APHC010647392025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 33501 OF 2025 Between: 1. BELLAM RAGHAVAIAH,, S/O. SUBBARAO, AGED 65 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. SAIBABA NAGAR, KOTHAPETA VILLAGE VETAPALEM MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, , PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, NH -16, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R DISTRICT. 4. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI AND PIU DIVISION, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 6. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER HOUSING, CHIRALA DIVISION, CHIRALA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 7. PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, WORKS ACCOUNTS, PRI AND 2 SRS, J W.P.No.33501 of 2025 PIU DIVISION, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 8. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KISHORE KUMAR KATARI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following order: Heard Sri Kishore Kumar Katari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning, appeared for the respondents 1 to 5, 7 & 8 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Housing appeared for the 6th respondent. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in non-payment of amount Rs.13,97,056/- in relation to the work executed by the petitioner i.e., Levelling of House sites at Jagan Anna Colony Layout at Chirala Nagaram 1 (V) of Chirala Mandal vide Proceedings RC No.H1/14/Land Levelling/2022, dated 05.05.2022 of the Collector and District Magistrate, Bapatla District, as illegal and arbitrary. 3 SRS, J W.P.No.33501 of 2025 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted instructions of Executive Engineer, PRI & PIU Division, Bapatla - 5th respondent dated 24.01.2026, wherein it is stated as follows: “Submitted 1st and part bill to the Project director Housing (Jagan anna layout- OTS), Bapatla for release of funds vide this office Lr.RC.No.A4/NON-OTS-Chirala nagar-1/2024 dated 15.10.2024. Payment will be arranged, whenever fund received from government. A letter, Lr.RC.No.A4/NON-OTS-Chirala nagar- 1/2024 dated 30.12.2025 was addressed to the district collector and magistrate, Bapatla for release of grant for release of funds vide this office.” 4. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions submitted by the Executive Engineer, PRI & PIU Division, Bapatla - 5th respondent, there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner’s entitlement. Since there is no dispute regarding the petitioner’s entitlement and the amount payable to the petitioner is undisputed and admitted, 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 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 4 SRS, J W.P.No.33501 of 2025 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.” 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release/pay an amount of Rs.13,97,056/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Fifty Six only) to the petitioner regarding the execution of the aforementioned work, within a period of 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: 27.01.2026 BSK 5 SRS, J W.P.No.33501 of 2025 286 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 33501 OF 2025 Date: 27.01.2026 BSK