APHC010565952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 29357/2025 Between: 1. NAGA SUBBAREDDY, , S/O.CHINNA RAMIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OEC CULTIVATOR, R/O. 1-142, APPPURAM, NUZENDLA, V APPAPURAM, GUNTUR DISTRIET, PINCODE 522660. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETAIY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NUZENDLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. 6. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S, SUB- DIVISION, VINUKONDA, PALNADU DISTRICT. Page 2 of 6 SRS,J W.P.No.29357 of 2025 7. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, RWS AND S, NUZENDLA, PALNADU DISTRICT. 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETAIY, V APPAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, NUZENDLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...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 topleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents not releasing the bill amounts of Rs.72,483/-, Rs.54,224/- and Rs.71,870/- with a totaling of Rs. 1,98,577/-, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., 1.Flushing of Existing Borewell and Repairs to Powerpumpset At Garnepudi Jajaiah (H) in V Appapuram Village of Huzendla Mandat, 2.Providing Pumpset and its accssories ro existing borewell at Nagella Venkataswami H in V Appapuram Village of Nuzendla Mandal and S.Removal of slit from the existing drains at V.Appapuram Village of V.Appapuram GP in Nuzendla Mandal under 15th Finance Grant is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay for payment of amounts of Rs.72,483/-, Rs.54,224/- and Rs.71,870/- with a totaling of Rs. 1,98,577/- with interest @24percentage per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work forthwith and pass 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 Please to direct the respondents to pay for the payment of amounts of Rs.72,483/-, Rs.54,224/- and Rs.71,870/- with a totaling of Rs. 1,98,577/- with interest @24percentage per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of works of Existing Borewell and Repairs to Powerpumpset At Garnepudi Jajaiah (H) in V Appapuram Village of Nuzendla Mandal, 2.Providing Pumpset and its accssories ro existing borewell at Nagella Venkataswami H in V Appapuram Village of Nuzendla Mandal and S.Removal of slit at V.Appapuram Village of V.Appapuram GP in Nuzendla Mandal under 15th Finance Grant, forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass p. 3 SRS,J W.P.No.29357 of 2025 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MODAPOTHULA SUMALATHA 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 Bathala Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents 1 to 4, 6 and 7 and Sri Hruthik, learned counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned standing counsel for respondents 5 and 8. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding an amounts of Rs.72,483/-, Rs.54,224/-, Rs.71,870/- (totaling to Rs.1,98,577/-) for the works executed by the petitioner i.e. i) Flushing of existing borewell and repairs to power pump set at Garnepudi Jajaiah (H) in V Appapuram Village of Nuzendla Mandal; ii) Providing pumpset and its accessories to existing borewell at Nagella Venkataswami H in V Appapuram Village of Nuzendla mandal and iii) Removal of slit from the existing drains at V. Appapuram Village of V. Appapuram GP in Nuzendla Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary. Page 4 of 6 SRS,J W.P.No.29357 of 2025 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that out of the total amount payable in respect of the aforementioned works, the amount in respect of three works was paid to the petitioner and the remaining amount of Rs.54,224/- has not been paid. 4. Learned counsel for respondents 5 and 8 submitted the instructions of respondent No.8, wherein it was admitted that the balance amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.54,224/- and two month’s time was sought to pay said amount. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions and the submission of learned counsel on either side, pending the writ petition, the respondents have paid Rs.72,483/- and Rs.71,870/- in respect of two works and there is no dispute regarding the balance amount of Rs.54,224/- which is payable to the petitioner. 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.=. p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 SRS,J W.P.No.29357 of 2025 6. Given the submission of learned counsel on either, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the balance amount of Rs.54,224/- (Rupees Fifty Four Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Four only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within two (02) 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: 28.01.2026 IKN p. 6 SRS,J W.P.No.29357 of 2025 256 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 29357 of 2025 Date: 28.01.2026 IKN