APHC010665542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THETWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 34561/2025 Between: 1. SINGISETTI SRAVANTHI KUMARI, D/O SINGISETTI SAIRAJ AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, METTA STREET, PARAGALA, BAIJIPETA, VIZIANAGARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH - 535557 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, PARVATHIPURAM, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT 5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, PARVATHIPURAM, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT 6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, PARVATHIPURAM, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT. 7. THE ASSISTANT PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, WORKS 2 ACCOUNTS, PARVATHIPURAM, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM 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 to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the amount of Rs.4,03,500/- (Rupees Four Lakh, Three Thousand and Five Hundred only) in respect of Agreement No. /2023-2024/15-12-2023 (GGMP- 4815-21509) for 'construction of CC Road from R and B Road to Bhagavathi Narasimhulu Kallam in Balijipeta Mandal' as illegal, arbitrary, malafide, high- handed, contrary to the established procedure of law apart from being violative of Arts. 14 and 19 (g) of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith release the payment of above bill amount along with interest 24 percent p.a. to the petitioner 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 process and pay the bills due to the petitioner for an amount of Rs.4,03,500/- (Rupees Four Lakh, Three Thousand and Five Hundred only) in respect of Agreement No. /2023-2024/15-12-2023 (GGMP:- 4815-21509) for “construction of CC Road from R&B Road to Bhagavathi Narasimhulu Kailam in Balijipeta Mandal” forthwith and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO 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 Bonu Rama Shankar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat 3 Raj and Rural Development, Finance and Planning Department, appeared for the respondents 1, 2, 4 to 7 and Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appeared for the 3rd respondent. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding an amount of Rs.4,03,500/- (Rupees Four Lakh Three Thousand and Five Hundred only) relating to the work executed by the petitioner for the construction of CC Road from R&B Road to Bhagavathi Narasimhulu Kallam in Balijipeta Mandal, in pursuance of Agreement No. /2023-2024/15-12-2023 (GGMP:- 4815-21509), as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted the written instructions of Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Parvathipuram-4th respondent. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the work and that the balance amount (net amount) payable to the petitioner is Rs.4,12,608/- (Rupees Four Lakh Twelve Thousand and Six Hundred and Eight only). 4. Thus, as seen from the instructions, 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 is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers 4 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.” 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.4,12,608/- (Rupees Four Lakh Twelve Thousand and Six Hundred and Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding the aforementioned work done by the petitioner, 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: 20.01.2026 SNI 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 110 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 34561 OF 2025 Date: 20.01.2026 SNI