APHC010620602023 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: 31943/2023 Between: 1. DWARAKA CONSTRUCTIONS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, R. MURALIMOHANREDDY, S/O. LATE R. SIVAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, D.NO. 1/722-1, DWARAKA NAGAR, KAPADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL AND COOPERATION (MKTG I) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ENGINEER IN CHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAI RAJ, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.I.U. DIVISION, BADVEL, KADAPA DISTRICT. 5. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 in withholding the payment of final bill amount of Rs.2,55,74,174/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., Package No. APAM/YSR/Mydukur/01, Consisting of 05 Road works in Mydukur Constituency of YSR Kadapa District. , vide C.R. agreement No. /2022-23, dt.20.10.2022, is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of Rs.2,55,74,174/- with interest @12percent per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work forthwith and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 for payment amount of Rs.2,55,74,174/ even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to tlie work i.e. Package No. APAM/YSR/Mydukur/01, Consisting of 05 Road works in Mydukur Constituency of YSR Kadapa District vide C.R. agreement No. /2022-23, dt.20.10.2022, forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and 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 may be pleased to permit to receive the counter affidavit copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the interest of justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following: 3 ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Anand Surya, learned counsel representing Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents withholding the payment of the final bill amount of Rs.2,55,74,174/- even after finalising the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., “Package No.APAM/YSR/Mydukur/01, Consisting of 05 Road works in Mydukur Constituency of YSR Kadapa District”, vide C.R.agreement No…/2022-23, dated 20.10.2022, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Managing Partner of the petitioner and the 3rd respondent entered into an agreement in relating to the aforementioned works on 20.10.2022. Thereafter, the petitioner carried out the works. However, the amount was not released. 4. A counter-affidavit was filed by the 4th respondent. In the counter- affidavit, it was stated as follows: “It is respectfully submitted that, with regard to Agreement No…/2022- 23 dated 20.10.2022 (Package No.1) the Gross amount is Rs.2,81,20,319/- after the statutory deductions including Quality Control Recoveries, that the net amount is payable to the petitioner is Rs.2,55,74,174/-. It is respectfully submitted that the Agriculture & Marketing Co- operation (MKTG-I) Dept issued the administrative sanctions to these 5 4 works without releasing budget release order and not giving Head of Account through which the payment are required to be made. The Panchayat Raj Department is only the executing wing entrusted for execution of the works. It is respectfully submitted that the Executive Engineer is unable to process the bill for payment due to above reasons not creating Budget release order/ Head of Account. Therefore, the 2nd respondent has made several written communications to Agriculture & Marketing Co- operation (MKTG-I) Dept and to the Finance Department for allotting head of Account vide Lr No.Memo.No AE/DEE1/Pothole free BT roads/2022 dated 12.07.2024, and Lr No.Memo.No AE/DEE1/Pothole free BT roads/2022 dated 06.08.2024 for realising of Budget release order and creating of head of Account. However, there is no response from the Agriculture & Marketing Co-operation (MKTG-I) Dept nor from the 1st respondent.” 5. Thus, as seen from the averments in the counter-affidavit, there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.2,55,74,174/-. 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 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 disputed questions of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.” 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.2,55,74,174/- (Rupees Two Cores Fifty Five Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Four only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within six (06) 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 SNI 6 275 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 31943 OF 2023 Date: 04.02.2026 SNI