SANGAM RAMANJANEYA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/29536/2025 · 2026-01-21
Subba Reddy Satti
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 25517 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 25517 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010567512025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 29536/2025 Between:
1. SANGAM RAMANJANEYA REDDY, S/O. CHANDRAMOULI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O. 1-94, RAMAYAPALEM VILLAGE, ADDANKI MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRIC
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE ENGINEERINCHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, OPPOSITE PWD GROUNDS, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND MAGISTRATE, BAPATIA DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, BAPATIA. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI PIU DIVISION, BAPATIA, BAPATIA DISTRICT. 6. THE RAMAYAPALEM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, RAMAYAPALEM VILLAGE, ADDANKI
2
MANDAL BAPATIA 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 to issue a Writ or Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the respondents in non-payment of bills payable to the petitioner to a tune of Rs. 8,14,245/- Rupees Eight Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Two Hundred and Forty-Five Only (Net Amount) for the works executed by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and against the Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1949 and consequently direct the respondents to pay the bill amount of Rs. 8,14,245/- Rupees Eight Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Two Hundred and Forty- Five Only (Net Amount), for the work executed by the petitioner 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 to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 22/07/2025, and to release the withholding bill amount payable to the petitioner to a tune of Rs. 8,14,245/- Rupees Eight Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Two Hundred and Forty-Five Only (Net Amount), and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BANDLA PAVAN 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 Bandla Pavan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj
3
and Rural Development, Finance and Planning, appeared for the respondents 1, to 5 and Sri Hruthik, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the 6th respondent. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.8,14,245/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Two Hundred and Forty Five only), payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., Construction of CC Road from Addanki Subba Rao house to Pathakamuri Subba Rao house and S.Mohan Reddy house to Burial ground at Ramayapalem Grama Panchayat of Ramayapalem Secretariat, Addanki Mandal, BIT-2 and Construction of CC Road from S.Mohan Reddy house to Burial ground at Ramayapalem Gram Panchayat of Ramayapalem Secretariat, Addanki Mandal, BIT-1. The Quality Control team inspected on 08.01.2024 and submitted a report on 11.01.2024. Despite the completion of the work, the amount was not released to the petitioner. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted instructions of Executive Engineer, PRI (PIU) Division, Bapatla-5th respondent dated
22.01.2026. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works, and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions is Rs.8,73,600/-. In fact, the respondent
4
authorities uploaded the bill in CFMS-2025-2343826, and the bill is under process. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions, there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner’s entitlement. 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.”
6. Given the instructions furnished by the 5th respondent, though there is a small variation in the amount claimed by the petitioner and the amount determined by the official, as payable to the petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.8,73,600/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand Six Hundred only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, on or before
31.03.2026. No order as to costs. 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400
5
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 22.01.2026 SNI
6
274 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 29536 OF 2025
Date: 22.01.2026 SNI