APHC010651612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 33760/2025 Between: 1. B. PRASANNA LAKSHMI,, W/O RAMESH, AGED 33 YEARS, CONTRACTOR, R/O. D.NO.4-102 ARTHAMURU VILLAGE, BANTUMILLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, 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 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT, MACHILIPATNAM. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI SUB DIVISION, MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MANDAL PRAJA p. 2 SRS,J W.P.No.33760 of 2025 PARISHAD, BANTUMILLI, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 7. THE ARTHAMURU GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, ARTHAMURU VILLAGE, BANTUMILLI MANDAL, KRISHNA 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action, things and deeds of Respondents in not paying the contract bill amount to the Petitioner i.e., Rs.12,56,168/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Eight Rupees only) in respect of the Works executed, which is illegal, irregular, arbitrary, unconstitutional, against to the Principles of Natural Justice and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents to pay the total contract bill amount i.e., Rs.12,56,168/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Eight Rupees only) in respect of the Works executed by the Petitioner i.e.. Construction of RBK building at Arthamuru-1 Village of Bantumilli Mandal and Construction of Grama Sachivalayam building at Arthamuru-1 Village of Bantumilli Mandal along with interest 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 direct the Respondents forthwith to pay the contract bill amount of Rs.12,56,168/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand One Flundred and Sixty Eight Rupees only) to the Petitioner in respect of the Works executed pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja p. 3 SRS,J W.P.No.33760 of 2025 Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri K.Nirmala Datta, learned counsel representing Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6, Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.7. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the bill amount of Rs.12,56,168/-, payable to the petitioner for execution of works i.e., „Construction of RBK building and Grama Sachivalayam building at Arthamuru-1 Village of Bantumilli 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 works and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions is Rs.12,56,168/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record. Page 4 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.33760 of 2025 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner‟s entitlement for Rs.12,56,168/-. 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.”. 6. Given the instructions furnished by respondent No.6, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.12,56,168/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Eight 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: 02.02.2026 JLV p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 SRS,J W.P.No.33760 of 2025 161 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 33760 of 2025 Date: 02.02.2026 JLV