APHC010583372024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 30520/2024 Between: 1. BASAM PITCHAIAH, S/O. CHINNA KOTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/0.2-3A, MAIN ROAD, EAST VENKATAPURAM VILLAGE DARSI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. . 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PR RD DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PR RD DEPARTMENT, SUB DIVISION, DARSI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, WORKS ACCOUNTS, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. Page 2 of 5 7. EAST VENKATAPURAM GRAMAPANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS., PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, EAST VENKATAPURAMVILLAGE, DARSI MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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, order or direction more particularly in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs. 2,46,064/-(SDF Grant) for the work executed by the Petitioner pursuant to the Divisional Agreement Bearing No. /2018-19, dated 08.03.2019 for Providing WBM Gr-ll surface to the road from Kothareddypalem to East Venkatapuram in East Venkatapuram Grampanchayat, Darsi Mandal, Prakasam District as illegal, irregular, irrational and violation of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to pay the amount of Rs. 2,46,064/- along with interest 24 percent per annum for the delaying the payment to the petitioner for the said work executed by the petitioner and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to direct the Respondents to pay the amount of Rs. 2,46,064/- (SDF Grant) for the work executed by the petitioner pursuant to the Divisional Agreement Bearing No. /2018-19, dated 08.03.2019 for Providing WBM Gr-ll surface to the road from Kothareddypalem to East Venkatapuram in East Venkatapuram Grampanchayat, Darsi Mandal, Prakasam District, pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GAJJALA MALLIKARJUNA REDDY 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: p. 3 ::ORDER :: Heard Sri G. Mallikarjuna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for respondents 1 to 6 and learned standing counsel for Housing Corporation, for respondent No.6. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing an amount of Rs.2,46,064/- in relation to the work executed by the petitioner i.e. ‘Providing WBM Gr-II Surface to the Road from Kothareddypalem to East Venkatapuram Gram Panchayat of Darsi Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of respondent No.4. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned work and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions, is Rs.1,99,457/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the same. 6. Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of the aforementioned work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.1,99,457/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ p. 4 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.”. 7. Given the instructions furnished by respondent No.4, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.1,99,457/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Nine Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Seven 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: 04.02.2026 IKN p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 30520 of 2024 Date: 04.02.2026 IKN