Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27320 (AP)

P KRISHNA v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/35198/2025 · 2026-01-26

Subba Reddy Satti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010679482025 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: 35198 OF 2025 Between: 1. P KRISHNA, S/O. VISWANADHAM, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. D. NO. 3-67/1, TATIPAKA PANCHAYAT ROAD, TATIPAKA, RAZOLE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF WORKS AND ACCOUNT OFFICER, ANJANEYA TOWERS, IBRAHIMPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, (PRI) AMALAPURAM, DR. B. R. AMBEDKARKONASEEMA DISTRICT. 5. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, OFFICE AT NAKKAL ROAD, SURYA RAO PETA, VIJAYAWADA. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI, AMALAPURAM, DR. B. R. 2 SRS, J W.P.No.35198 of 2025 AMBEDKARKONASEEMA DISTRICT. 7. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI SUB DIVISION, RAZOLE, DR. B. R. AMBEDKARKONASEEMA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ANNAMNEEDI BALAKRISHNA 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 Annamneedi Balakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, 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 the balance amount of Rs.4,29,861/- in relation to the works executed by the petitioner i.e., 1) Construction of BC Community Hall in Apparivarimeraka in Kunavaram (V), 2) Providing CC Road from RTC Colony Chintalapalli, R&B road to Revu Masenu Site in Sivakoti Village of Razole Mandal 3) Providing CC Road from Devabolla Sesha Rao house to Shaik Sharif site at RTC Colony in Sivakoti Village of Razole Mandal, 4) Providing CC Road from Appari Madhu house to Gubbala Ramakrishna Fields in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 5) Providing CC Road from DondapaatiSwarajya Laxmi house to Palli Jyothi house in Ponnamanda 3 SRS, J W.P.No.35198 of 2025 village of Razone Mandal 6) Providing CC Road from Kadali Kantha Rao House to Kombathulapeddi Raju house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 7) Providing CC Road from Moka Bala Krishna house to Moka Rama rao house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 8) Providing CC Road from Manne Satyanarayana house to Mandapati Suryanarayana house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 9) Providing CC Road from Gubbala Rama Krishna Fields to Appari Dasu house in Ponnamanda Village of Razole Mandal, 10) Providing CC Road from Chamanthi Chandra rao house to Pitani Rama Chandra Rao house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 11) Providing CC Road from Kadali Kameswara Rao house to GeddadaSamudram house near Ambothu Temple in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 12) Providing CC Road from Kususma Balaraju house to Sarella Venkatram house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 13) Providing CC Road from Antiri Srinu House to Kadali Satyanarayana house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 14) Providing CC Road from Elamandala Rajest house to Chamanthi Suresh house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 15) Providing CC Road from Vipparthi Srinu house to Geddam Arjun Rao house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 16) Providing CC Road from No.2 Canal bridge to Inguva Durga Rao house in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal, 17) Providing CC Road from R&B road to Udugulamma Temple in Ponnamanda village of Razole Mandal and 18) Construction of Slab culvert on Drain near Gummappu Hemalatha house at Chennadam village of Vegivaripalem Sachivalayam, as illegal and arbitrary. 4 SRS, J W.P.No.35198 of 2025 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer, PR Division, Amalapuram – 6th respondent dated 25.01.2026. 4. As seen from the instructions, the total value of the work done by the petitioner in relation to the aforementioned works is Rs.52,06,890/-. After QC recovery of Rs.1,44,344/-, the balance amount payable to the petitioner comes to Rs.50,62,546/-. Out of the same, an amount of Rs.46,32,685/- was already paid to the petitioner, and the balance amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.4,29,861/-. 5. In reply, Sri Annamneedi Balakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, endorses that the balance amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.4,29,861/-. 6. Thus, as seen from the instructions and the submission of learned counsel on either side, there is no dispute regarding the balance amount of Rs.4,29,861/- payable to the petitioner. 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 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 SRS, J W.P.No.35198 of 2025 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.”. 7. Given the submission of learned counsel on either side, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the balance amount of Rs.4,29,861/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty One 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: 27.01.2026 BSK 6 SRS, J W.P.No.35198 of 2025 294 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 35198 OF 2025 Date: 27.01.2026 BSK