APHC010663852025 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: 34365/2025 Between: 1. SIVA SAI CONSTRUCTIONS, (FIRM NO. 66 OF 2010) D.NO.15-198, MAIN ROAD, KUTAGULLA KADIRI-515591, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI K V SAI PRANEETH REDDY, S/O. K V RAMACHANDRA REDDY ...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 STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DIVISION CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PR, PIU DIVISION CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 5. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, NH -16, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PIU SUB-DIVISION, p. 2 SRS,J W.P.No.34365 of 2025 PALAMANER CHITTOOR DISTRICT 7. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PIU SUB-DIVISION, PALAMANER CHITTOOR DISTRICT 8. THE DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS OFFICER WORKS, PIU DIVISION, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR 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 topleased to issue an appropriate order, writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the EMD and FSD amount of Rs.5,99,055/- to the petitioner for the works done by the petitioner in terms of Agreements entered by the 3RD respondent vide Agreement No./2017-18, dated 12.02.2018 as Illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to the said undisputed EMD and FSD pay amounts 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 release the undisputed the EMD FSD amount of Rs.5,99,055/- for the works done by the petitioner in terms of Agreements entered by the 3rd respondent vide Agreement NO./2017- 18, dated:12.02.2018 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M SIVA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: p. 3 SRS,J W.P.No.34365 of 2025 ::ORDER :: Heard Sri M. Siva Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing EMD and FSD amount of Rs.5,99,055/- payable to the petitioner for execution of works i.e. „Providing BT surface to the road from Noolukunta road to Mallanur Road (via) Dommara Agraharam of Kuppam Mandal of Chittoor District‟, in pursuance of agreement No./2017-18 dated 12.02.2018, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted instructions, furnished by Executive Engineer, PIU Division, Chittoor respondent No.4, wherein it is stated as follows: “The refund of deposit bill was returned to the DEE PIU SD Palamaner with certain remarks and to creation of TS and Agreement in nidhi work Module, as the existing payment system of CFMS changed to nidhi work module system vide this office memo No.Roc.T1/Deposits Dt:26.07.2024. Hence the bill was now under process in nidhi work module system.” 4. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner‟s entitlement for Rs.5,99,055/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. Page 4 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.34365 of 2025 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.4, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.5,99,055/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Ninety Nine Thousand and Fifty Five only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, 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: 27.01.2026 IKN p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 SRS,J W.P.No.34365 of 2025 253 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 34365 of 2025 Date: 27.01.2026 IKN