APHC010689092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] MONDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 35763/2025 Between: 1. M/S ABHILASHA COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,, G-69, SECTOR-6, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH-201301 THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE EMAIL. ABHILASHACOMMERCIALPVTLTD@GMAIL.COM 2. MR. PANKAJ ARORA, DIRECTOR, ABHILASHA COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED G-69, SECTOR-6, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH-201301 THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE EMAIL. ABHILASHACOMMERCIALPVTLTD@GMAIL.COM ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS REPRESENTED PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH - 522238 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522238 3. STATE PROJECT DIRECTOR, SAMAGRA SHIKSHA HAVING 2 OFFICE AT KBC BOYS HIGH SCHOOL PREMISES OPPOSITE RYTHU BAZAR, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH – 520010 ...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 Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other nature, order and/or direction to a) Declare that the Respondents' failure to release the admitted payment despite issuance of the Completion Certification dated 23.07.2025 in favour of the Petitioner is arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of, inter alia, Articles 14, Article 19 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India b) Direct the Respondents to forthwith release the sum of Rs. 15,31,84,389/- (Rupees Fifteen Crore Thirty-One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Nine) within a specified timeline as deemed appropriate by this Hon'ble Court, along with applicable interest as prescribed under the MSME Act, 2006 or as deemed appropriate, until the date of realization c) Award costs of the proceedings in favour of the Petitioners and) d) 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: a) Direct the Respondents to process and sanction the admitted payment due to the Petitioners of Rs. 15,31,84,389/- (Rupees Fifteen Crore Thirty- One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Nine) along with applicable interest as prescribed under the MSME Act, 2006 or as deemed appropriate by this Hon’ble Court until the date of realization; OR Alternatively, direct the Respondents to deposit the aforementioned due amount of Rs. 15,31,84,389/- (Rupees Fifteen Crore Thirty-One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Nine) along witfi applicable interest before this Hon’ble Court; and b) Pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. VARUN BYREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 3 1. RAGHU BABU KALAMATA SC For Samagra Siksha 2. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.35763 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.15,31,84,389/- along with interest for supply of 5,27,024 units and additional 41,027 units of School Bags as per Work Orders vide Lr.Rc.No.SS-16201/68/2023-CMO SEC- SSA-7, dated 15.03.2024 and Lr.Rc.No.SS-16201/68/2023-CMO SEC- SSA-4, dated 25.06.2024 . 2. The facts, in brief, are as follows: The State Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 10.01.2024 giving permission to the Project Director of Samagra Shiksha to conduct negotiations with vendors for repeat orders for implementing the “Jagananna Vidya Kanuka” scheme (excluding text books and work books). Pursuant thereto, negotiations were held and Respondent No.3 had issued Work Orders Work Orders vide Lr.Rc.No.SS-16201/68/2023- CMO SEC-SSA-7, dated 15.03.2024 and Lr.Rc.No.SS-16201/68/2023- CMO SEC-SSA-4, dated 25.06.2024 to the Petitioner for supply of 5,27,024 units and additional units of 41,027 School Bags to the students studying Class I to X in all Government Management Schools for the Academic Year 2024-25 at Rs.269.65/- per unit. The Petitioner had supplied the School Bags in terms of the above Work Orders and a 5 satisfactory Work Completion Certificate was also issued on 23.07.2025. However, the amount of Rs.15,31,84,389/- due towards the supply was not made to the Petitioner despite repeated requests. 3. In the Counter-Affidavit filed by Respondent No.3, no dispute with regard to the supply of School Bags as per the Work Order was urged and it was stated that amounts would be released after Respondent No.2 releases the amounts. The relevant portion of the Counter-Affidavit is extracted below; “9. I humbly submit that this answering respondent submitted the entire bills of the student kit supplied for the year 2024-25 vide Letter Rc.No.SS-16021/68/2023-CMO-SEC-SSA, dated 12.07.2024 and 14.09.2025, seeking administrative sanction. Accordingly, Government vide G.O.Ms.No.1, School Education (Prog.II) Department, Dated 19.01.2026 accorded administrative sanction. I humbly submit that as stated supra, as soon as these answering respondents receives the amount, after due verification of the delivery challans, based on the data uploaded in the app and as well as in terms of the tender conditions and agreement clauses, reconciliation will be conducted with the petitioner and the payment shall be made to the petitioner. 10. I humbly submit that as stated supra as the Government has accorded administrative sanctions, this answering respondent has submitted the bills to the respondent no.2, token numbers were raised and same are pending for clearance, which shall take minimum of 8 weeks. Thus, unless the respondent no.2 releases the amount, these answering respondents could not release the payment and so far as the claim of interest is concerned, since there was a delay in getting administrative sanction from the 6 Government which is purely on the administrative grounds, the writ petitioners cannot claim the interest on the delayed payment. Thus, the petitioner herein has not warranted any grounds against these answering respondents for the interference of the Hon’ble High Court, and the writ petition is liable for dismissal against these answering respondents.” 4. It is pertinent to mention that paragraphs 8 and 9 of G.O.Ms.No.1, School Education (Prog.II) Department, dated 19.01.2026 reads as under: 8. Government, after careful examination of the matter, hereby: i. accord administrative approval for an amount of Rs.944.53 crores (Central share of Rs.291.88 crores + State share of Rs.652.65 crores) for procurement and supply of Student Kits to students studying classes I to X in all Government Management Schools for the Academic Year 2024-25 i.e. pertaining to purchase orders given on 15.03.2024 without financial concurrence and ii. provide budget provision for an amount of Rs.652.65 crores under the relevant head from the State Budget. 9. The State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha, shall take further necessary action accordingly, in the matter. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks for interest on the admitted amounts towards delayed payment. It is further submitted that due to non-payment of dues to the Petitioner, the Petitioner is suffering from severe stress caused by the suppliers of raw material. 7 6. Heard Sri Varun Byreddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Government Pleader for School Education for the Respondents. 7. Taking note of the submissions made by both the counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) The Respondents are directed to disburse the admitted principal amount due to the Petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; ii) The Respondents are also directed to examine the claim of interest on delayed payments to the Petitioner independently taking note of the business practices; iii) No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 16.02.2026 KLP