Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 272 (AP)

P VENKATESWARA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/5956/2026 · 2026-04-05

Subba Reddy Satti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010100532026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5956/2026 Between: 1. P VENKATESWARA REDDY, S/O. NAGI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.1-15, ANNAVARAM VILLAGE, PODILI MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT - 523240. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522237 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522237 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT.523316 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PODILI MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT.523240 5. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, ANNAVARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, PODILI MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT.523253 6. THE ASST EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S, PODILI, PODILI MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT. 523240 7. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S, MARKAPURAM, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT. 523316 8. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S, MARKAPURAM, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT. 523316 ...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 one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the amount of Rs. 20,86,071/- approximately due to the petitioner after completing the contractual work of laying internal CC Roads in 5th respondent Gram Panchayat, Podili Mandal, Prakasam District is arbitrary, illegal, colourable exercise of power and violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to make the payments forthwith for the works completed by the petitioner in 5th respondent Gram Panchayat, Podili Mandal, Prakasam District amounting to Rs. 20,86,071/- 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 to direct the respondents to make the payment of due amount to the petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 to implead the proposed respondents as respondent No. 9, 10, 11 and 12 in the Writ Petition No. 5956 of 2026 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N SRIHARI 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 N.Srihari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Finance and Planning for the respondents 1 to 3, 6 and 8 and Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the respondents 4 and 5. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.20,86,071/- payable to the petitioners in relation to the work i.e., laying internal CC Roads in the 5th respondent Gram Panchayat, Podili Mandal, Prakasam District, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents released the amount to the petitioner, and no further adjudication is required in the writ petition. The statement made by the learned counsel is recorded and made part of the record. 4. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 06.04.2026 SNI 9 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5956 OF 2026 Date: 06.04.2026 SNI