APHC010636432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 33017/2025 Between: 1. G LINGA NAIDU, S/O G.VENKATARAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, MUDIGUBBA VILLAGE AND MANDAL SRI SATYASAI DIST ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETAIY, IRRIGATION AND CAD DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. 3. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DHARMAVARAM, SRI SATYASAI DIST 4 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PRI, . PENUGONDA, SRI SATYASAI DIST. 5. 5. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, MUDIGUBBA, SRI SATYASAI DIST. (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) W.P. NO. O F 2025 6. 6. THE MPDO, MUDIGUBBA, SRI SATYASAI DIST. 7. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT – 522 238. Page 2 of 6 8. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PVS ICON, PATHURU CROSS ROAD, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT – 522 501. ...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 in action of the Respondents in withholding the bills amounts payable to the petitioner in respect of above works even after finalizing the works as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to pay the total bill amount of Rs.5,44,889/- payable to the petitioner in respect of execution of the above mentioned works 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 the total bill amount i.e. Rs.5,44,889/- payable to the petitioner in respect of above works pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 me to be Implead proposed respondents as respondents nos. 7 to 8 in the above Writ Petition No. 33017 of 2025 and pending miscellaneous petitions therein in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NAVULURU KRISHNA SAI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING p. 3 ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Navuluru Krishna Sai, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and CAD, for respondents 1, 3 and 4; Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for respondents 2, 7 and 8 and learned standing counsel for respondents 5 and 6. 2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING p. 3 ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Navuluru Krishna Sai, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and CAD, for respondents 1, 3 and 4; Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for respondents 2, 7 and 8 and learned standing counsel for respondents 5 and 6. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding an amount of Rs.5,44,889/- payable to the petitioner for the works executed i.e. 1) „Providing C.C. Road from P. Venkatesh House to Bus Stand and Bus Stand to Kristappa House at Thappetavaripalli (V), Mudigubba (M), 2) Providing C.C. Road from Chowdaiah (H) to D. Chenna Reddy (H) and Bayyanna (H) to B. Pullappa House and Venkataramudu (H) to Ramudu (H) at NSP Kottala (V) of Mudigubba (M), 3) Providing CC Road from A. Venkataramudu (H) to T. Muneppa (H) and K. Ramakrishna (H) to K. Sreenivasulu (H) at M. Kottala (V) of Mudigubba (M), 4) Providing CC Road from Temple to M. Bayappa (H) and Ramachandra (H) to Venkata Ramudu (H) and Temple to Ganganna (H) at Thappetavaripalli (V) of Mudigubba (M), 5) Providing CC Road from K. Adinayrana (H) to M. Bayanna (H) in BC Colony of AB Pall (V), Mudigubba (M), 6) Providing CC Road from Aggiramudu (H) to Chitti Lali (H) at AB Pall (V), Mudigubba (M), 7) Providing CC Road from Mallepalli Road to Ramaswamy Temple at thappetavaripalli (V), Mudigubba (M), 8) Providing CC Road from Lakshmidevi (H) to Gangulappa (H) at Siddannagaripalli (V) of Mudigubba (M), 9) Providing CC Roads from L. Chandra House to G. Sreeramulu House and a. Ramakrishna House to M. Ganesh House at M. Kottala (V), Mudigubba (M), 10) Providing CC Roads from Sankar Naik House to Rami Reddy House and Dharma Naik House to Lakshmi Ram House at NSP Kottala (V), Mudigubba (M) and 11) Providing CC Roads from SC Colony p. 4 main road to Aijaya House at thappetavaripalli (V), Mudigubba (M) vide work ID Nos.127053821025080011, 127053818021080031, 1270538- 18021080029, 127053821025080013, 127053812014080062, 127053812014080064, 127053821025080004, 127053808009080023, 127053818021080030, 127053818021080028 and 127053821025080009, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Penukonda. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works for a total value of Rs.69,89,043/- and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions of Rs.2,24,254/- is Rs.67,64,789/- out of which the petitioner was paid Rs.62,19,848/- and the balance amount payable is 5,44,941/-. The instructions are made 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 for Rs.5,44,941/-. 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.” p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 6. Given the instructions furnished by Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Penukonda, though there is a small variation in the amount claimed by the petitioner and the amount determined by the official, payable to the petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.5,44,941/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Forty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty One only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned works, 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: 18.03.2026 IKN p. 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 33017 of 2025 Date: 18.03.2026 IKN