Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25559 (AP)

NAGA SUBBAREDDY v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/29367/2025 · 2026-01-21

Subba Reddy Satti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010565812025 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: 29367/2025 Between: 1. NAGA SUBBAREDDY, S/O.CHINNA RAMIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATOR, R/O. 1-142, APPPURAM, NUZENDLA, V APPAPURAM, GUNTUR DISTRICT, PINCODE 522660. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ 65 RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, 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, PRI SUB DIVISION, VINUKONDA, PALANDU DISTRICT. 7. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, MPP, NUZENDLA, PALNADU 2 DISTRICT 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, 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 to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents not releasing the part bill amounts of Rs.1,11,298/- out of Rs.4,33,646/-, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e Completion of Incomplete Grama Panchayat Office Building in V.Appapuram Village of Nuzendla Mandal under ISth Finance Grant is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay for payment of amounts of Rs.l,11,298/- out of Rs.4,33,646/- with interest 24 percentage 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 to direct the respondents to pay for part payment of amount of Rs.1,11,298/- out of Rs.4,33,646/- with interest 24 percentage per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of works i.e. Completion of Incomplete Grama Panchayat Office Building in V.Appapuram Village of Nuzendla Mandal under 15th Finance Grant, forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass 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: 3 :: ORDER :: Heard Ms. Naseem Sultana, learned counsel representing Sri Bathala Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, appeared for the respondents 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 and Sri Hruthik, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel, appeared for respondents 5 and 8. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the bill amounts of Rs.1,11,298/- (Rupees One Lakhs Eleven Thousand Two Hundred and Ninety Eight only), payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., Completion of Incomplete Grama Panchayat Office Building in V.Appapuram Village of Nuzendla Mandal under 15th Finance Grant. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents released the amount to the petitioner, and no further adjudication is required in the writ petition. The statement made by the learned counsel is recorded and made part of the record. 4. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs. 4 As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 22.01.2026 SNI 5 267 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 29367 OF 2025 Date: 22.01.2026 SNI