APHC010635032025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 34649 OF 2025 Between: 1. M/S. PN CONSTRUCTIONS, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR VISSA PRASAD, S/O.V KOTESWARARAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O.2-6-9/2, SUBBAREDDY THOTA, JAI SANKAR NAGAR, CHIRALA, BAPATLA DISTRICT, PINCODE 523155. ...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 SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, AP STATE HOUSING CORPORATION (APSHCL), VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, AP STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED (APSHCL), BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 6. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PR CIRCLE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI-PIU DIVISION, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 8. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, APCFSS, 3RD FLOOR, NIDHI BHAVAN, BEHIND APIIC BUILDING, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, PINCODE 522503. 2 SRS, J W.P.No.34649 of 2025 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MODAPOTHULA SUMALATHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following order: Heard Smt. Naseem Sultana, learned counsel representing Smt. Modapothula Sumalatha, learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for respondent Nos.1, 2, 6, 7, 8, Smt. Vijayasree, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for the 5th respondent and Sri Mallikarjuna Moorthy, learned Standing Counsel, for respondent Nos.3 and 4. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the bill amount of Rs.6,74,882/- in relation to the work executed by the petitioner i.e. ‘Construction of 20 Feet welcome ARCH at YSR Jagananna colony Layout No.082405LA106147 in Challareddypalem Village, Vetapalem Mandal’ pursuant to agreement No. /2023-24, dated 26.10.2023, 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 Executive Engineer PR Division, Bapatla - respondent No.7. 3 SRS, J W.P.No.34649 of 2025 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.6,09,228/-. 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 submitted by the Executive Engineer PR Division, Bapatla - respondent No.7, there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.6,09,228/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 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.7, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release/pay an amount of 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 4 SRS, J W.P.No.34649 of 2025 Rs.6,09,228/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding the execution of the aforementioned work, within three (03) 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: 21.01.2026 BSK 5 SRS, J W.P.No.34649 of 2025 402 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 34649 OF 2025 Date: 21.01.2026 BSK