APHC010555882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 28978/2025 Between: 1. GUNNAPANENI VENKATA REDDY,, S/O. SANJIVA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. KONIJEDU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (PANCHAYAT RAJ WING), ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD, TANGUTUR MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. THE MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, TANGUTURU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKSAM DISTRICT 6. THE KONIJEDU GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KONIJEDU VILLAGE, TANGUTUR MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. Page 2 of 7 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the Respondents in withholding the payments of (1) Rs. 3,70,267/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Seventy Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Seven Only) to the executed works vide Construction of Drain from Tanniru Kotaih(H) to Pammi Badrireddy barn in Vaddipalem of Konijedu GP of Tangutur Mandal (2) Rs. 3,34,107/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Thirty four Thousand One Hundred and Seven Only) to the executed works vide Construction of Drain from Tanniru Kotaih(H) to Pulli Nageswara Rao (H) of Konijedu GP of Tangutur Mandal (3) Rs. 72,269/- (Rupees Seventy Two Thousand Two Hundred sixty and nine Only) to the executed works vide Construction of Mungamuru Road way Culvert oppsit Thanniru Kotaiah (H) in Konijedu GP of Tangutur Mandal and (4) Rs.55,150/- (Rupees Fifty Five Thousand one Hundred and Fifty Only to the executed works vide Construction of Drain from Gunji Brahmaiah (H) to Gunji Kotaiah place in Vaddipalem of Konijedu GP of Tangutur Mandal comprising in total Rs.8,31,793/-(Rupees Eight Lakhs Thirty one Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety three only) even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in respect of the Works under the GP 15th Finance funds duly approved by the respondents as bad, illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and against the Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the amount of Rs.8,31,793/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Thirty one Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety three only) with interest @ 24percent per annum for the delayed amount till date of realization for the works executed by the petitioner and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay the amount of Rs.8,31,793/-(Rupees Eight Lakhs Thirty one Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety three only) due to the petitioner in respect of execution of said works executed by the Petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the writ petition pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK MEERAVALI p. 3 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Shaik Meeravali, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for the respondents 1 to 3, and Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the respondents 4 to 6. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding the payments of Rs.8,31,793/- (Rs.3,70,267/- + Rs.3,34,107/- + Rs.72,269/- + Rs.55,150/-), payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., 1) Construction of Drain from Tanniru Kotaih House to Pammi Badrireddy barn in Vaddipalem of Konijedu Gram Panchayat of Tangutur Mandal, 2) Construction of Drain from Tanniru Kotaih house to Pulli Nageswara Rao house of Konijedu Gram Panchayat of Tangutur Mandal, 3) Construction of Mungamuru Road way culvert opposite Thanniru Kotaiah house in Konijedu Gram Panchayat of Tangutur Mandal, and 4) Construction of Drain from Gunji Brahmaiah house to Gunji Kotaiah place in Vaddipalem of Konijedu Gram Panchayat of Tangutur Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary. Page 4 of 7 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has completed the works; however, the respondent failed to release the amounts. 4. Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the respondents 4 to 6, submitted the written instructions of the Panchayat Secretary of the 6th respondent dated 23.12.2025. The relevant portion reads as follows: <It is submitted that Works Committed of this Gram panchayat has not allotted any of the work to the petitioner, it is also submitted that the petitioner submitted the M.Books relating the execution of the works; where, no contractor name is mentioned. It is therefore submitted that there is no proof that this Gram Panchayat believe the four works are executed by the petitioner. Further, this Gram Panchayat need to verify that who has executed the above said works and after verifying this Gram Panchayat will pay the bills.= 5. Given the instructions of the Panchayat Secretary of the 6th respondent, this Court directed the learned Mandal Development Officer – 5th respondent, to conduct an inquiry and submit a report regarding the execution of the works. 6. A report of the Mandal Development Officer – 5th respondent, was filed vide USR No.35641/2026 dated 23.03.2026. In the report, it was noted as follows: <In compliance with the said orders, all concerned Files, Registers, and Measurement Books (M-Books) relating to W.P.No.28978/2025 of Konijedu Gram Panchayat, Tanguturu Mandal, Prakasam District, A.P. have been thoroughly verified. Upon examination, it is found that the works in question were executed by the petitioner, Sri Gunnapaneni Venkata Reddy. The same p. 5 has been recorded in the Measurement Books and duly certified by the then Assistant Engineer, Sri Kota Srihari Garu, whose certificate has been obtained. It is therefore humbly submitted to the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. that all the said works were executed by Sri Gunnapaneni Venkata Reddy, and a proper certificate to this effect is also being enclosed.= 7. A certificate issued by the Assistant Engineer, Mandal Praja Parishad, Tangutur, dated 30.09.2022, is also placed on record in support of the said report. 8. Thus, as seen from the report, there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.8,31,793/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors v. Chief General Manager & Ors1, it was held at Para No.8 as under: <Be that as it may, the High court has not dealt with the merits of the writ petition. Moreover, it is not an inviolable rule that no money claim can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Non-payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the part of respondents and for claiming the same, a writ petition may lie. Further, throwing a writ petition on ground of availability of alternative remedy after 10 years, particularly, when parties have exchanged their affidavits, is not the correct course unless there are disputed questions of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence=. 9. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.8,31,793/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Thirty One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety Three p. 6 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned works, subject to statutory deductions, within three (03) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 24.03.2026 SNI p. 7 184 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 28978 OF 2025 Date: 24.03.2026 SNI