APHC010667672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 34582/2025 Between: 1. VEERAVALLI NARASIMHA SWAMY, S/O.VENKANNA, AGE 49 YEARS, OCC CONVENOR VILLAGE WORKS COMMITTEE, BHATLAMAGUTUR VILLAGE, PENUNTRA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PR ABD RW DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPT., SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, BHIMAVARAM. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PR AND RD, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, BHIMAVARAM. 5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NARSAPURAM DIVISION, NARSAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. Page 2 of 6 SRS,J W.P.No.34582 of 2025 6. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, BHIMAVARAM. 7. THE GRAMPANCHAYATI, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, BATLAMAGUTURU VILLAGE, PENUMANTRA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 8. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RWS & DEPT.,), RWS & S DIVISION, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 9. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RWS & DEPT.,), RWS & S SUB-DIVISION, ACHANA, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 10. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER (RWS & DEPT.,), RWS & S SECTION, PENUMANTRA, WEST GODAVARI 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 an appropriate Writ order, or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of mandamus and declaring the inaction of the respondents withholding payment of the balance net amount at Rs.4,75,424/-(as per M.Book No.1062A/RWS (K) 2021-22 payable to the Petitioner in relation to the works in Bhatlamaguturu Village, Penumantra Mandal, West Godavari District for the year2017-2018 under DMF grants is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of net amount of Rs.4,75,424/-(as per M.Book NO.1062A/RWS (K) 2021-22 Vide Agreement No.-/2023-24, dt.08..11.2023 with interest @ 24 percent per annum for the delayed amount to the Petitioner in respect of execution of the above mentioned works in Bhatlamagutur Village, Penumantra Mandal, West Godavari District 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 pleased to direct the respondents to consider for payment of net amount of Rs.4,75,424/-(as per M.Book NO.1062A/RWS (K) 2021-22, Vide Agreement No.~ /2023-24, dt.08..11.2023 with interest @ 24% per annum for the delayed amount to the Petitioner in respect of execution of the above p. 3 SRS,J W.P.No.34582 of 2025 mentioned works in Bhatlamagutur Village, Penumantra Mandal, West Godavari District forthwith 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 implead 1. The Executive Engineer, RWS and S Division, Bhimavaram,West Godavari District, 2). The Deputy Executive Engineer, RWS & S Sub- Division, Achanta, West Godavari District and 3). The Asst.Engineer, RWS and S Section, Penumantra, West Godavari District as respondents 8 to 10 in the above W.P No. 34582/2025 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MANDA VENKATESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 3. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY 4. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Eathakota Venkata Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for respondents 1, 2 and 4; Ms. P. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent No.3; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines, for respondent No.6 and Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned standing counsel for respondent No.7. Page 4 of 6 SRS,J W.P.No.34582 of 2025 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding an amount of Rs.4,75,424/-, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work executed by the petitioner i.e. ‘Construction of CC Drain from Eleti Dhanalakshmi House to Polamuru Bhusanam House in SC area in Bhatlamaguturu Gram Panchayat of Penumantra Mandal (HIW – ID : RWS – 4978 – 5555), 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 work for a value of Rs.4,75,424/- and the net amount payable to the petitioner after QC recovery / statutory deductions is Rs.4,29,668/-. 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 there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.4,29,668/-. 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 p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 SRS,J W.P.No.34582 of 2025 of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.”. 7. Given the instructions furnished by respondent No.4, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.4,29,668/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within two (02) 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: 24.02.2026 IKN p. 6 SRS,J W.P.No.34582 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 34582 of 2025 Date: 24.02.2026 IKN