Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27748 (AP)

Gadde Siva Shankar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/36711/2025 · 2026-01-29

Subba Reddy Satti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010704392025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 36711/2025 Between: 1. GADDE SIVA SHANKAR,, S/O. AMARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, D NO. 2-104, KESANUPALLI, NARASARAOPET MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEPARTMENT (R.D-II), SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, D. NO. 12-47, PVS ICON, PATHURU CROSS ROAD, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S SUB- DIVISION, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 6. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S SUB- DIVISION, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. Page 2 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.36711 of 2025 7. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, RWS AND S SUB- DIVISION, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU 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 to pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction the part of the respondents herein not releasing the total bills amount worth of Rs.9,23,031/- (Rupees Nine lakhs twenty three thousand and thirty one only) with interest @ 12percent p.a., as per the Judgment of this Hon'ble Court In W.P. No.19525/2021 (W.P. No. 10038/2021 and Batch) dated 05.10.2021 under grant of GPGF to the petitioner till today after completion of execution of Transportation of Drinking water with tankers in SRKT colony in Kesanupalli Gramapanchayat in Narasaraopet Mandal Palnadu District, and causing heavy loss with Interest even though the work was completed within time as illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the Respondents to release and pay the total bills amount of Rs.9,23,031/- (Rupees Nine lakhs twenty three thousand and thirty one only) with Interest under grant of GPGF forthwith to the petitioner 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 to direct the respondents to release and pay the total bills amount worth of Rs.9,23,031/- (Rupees Nine lakhs twenty three thousand and thirty one only) with Interest under grant of GPGF forthwith to the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: Page 3 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.36711 of 2025 :: ORDER :: The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing an amount of Rs.9,23,031/- with interest @ 12% p.a., as per the Judgment of this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No.19525/2021 (W.P. No. 10038/2021 and Batch) dated 05.10.2021 under grant of GPGF to the petitioner, even after completion of execution of Transportation of Drinking water with tankers in SRKT colony in Kesanupalli Gramapanchayat in Narasaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard Sri M.Narendra Babu, learned counsel representing Sri Narra Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, appeared for respondents 1 to 7. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of the Executive Engineer, RWS&S Division, Narasaraopet – respondent No.5. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the work in completion of the transportation of drinking water with tankers in SRKT colony in Kesanupalli Gramapanchayat in Narasaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District, and the balance amount payable to the petitioner is Page 4 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.36711 of 2025 Rs.9,23,031/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the same. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions, there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.9,23,031/-. 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 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.5, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.9,23,031/- 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: 30.01.2026 S D P 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 Page 5 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.36711 of 2025 230 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 36711/2025 Date: 30.01.2026 S D P