APHC010696492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 2746/2026 Between: 1. GURRAM PULLAREDDY, S/O AMARAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, CONTRACTOR, R/O.D.NO.11-167/A, VENKATAPURAM, GUTTIKONDA GRAM PANCHAYAT, PIDUGURALLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT,522239 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT (EARLIER GUNTUR).522004 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S DIVISION, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT (EARLIER GUNTUR). 522601 5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S SUB-DIVISION, PIDUGURALLA, PALNADU DISTRICT (EARLIER GUNTUR). 522601 p. 2 6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, RWS AND S, PIDUGURALLA, PALNADU DISTRICT (EARLIER GUNTUR). 522601 7. THE ASSISTANT PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, LINGAMGUNTLA, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT (EARLIER GUNTUR).522601 ...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 or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action, things and deeds of Respondents in not paying the contract bill amount to the Petitioner i.e., Rs.4,35,867/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Seven Eight Only) in respect of the works carried by the Petitioner , which is illegal, irregular, arbitrary, unconstitutional, against to the Principles of Natural Justice and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents to pay the total contract bill amount of Rs.4,35,867/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Seven Eight Only)'along with interest for the works carried by the Petitioner 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 forthwith to pay the total contract bill amount of Rs.4,35,867/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Seven Eight Only)along with interest in respect of works carried by the Petitioner pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MANIKANTA THOTA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING p. 3 The Court made the following: ORDER Heard Sri Manikanta Thota., learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 paying the contract bill amount to the Petitioner i.e., Rs.4,35,867/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Seven Eight Only) in respect of the works carried by the Petitioner, 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 the 4th respondent-Executive Engineer RWS&S Division, Narsaraopeta. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions is Rs.4,60,411/-. 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 works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.4,60,441/-. 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 p. 4 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 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 the 4th respondent, though there is a small variation in the amount claimed by the petitioner and the amount determined by the official, as payable to the petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.4,60,411/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Sixty Thousand Four Hundred and Eleven 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 IKN