APHC010108902026 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: 6067/2026 Between: 1. ANGURU DHASARADHA NAIDU, S/O. LATE RAMA CHANDRUDU AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, CONVENER, VWC, R/O. RAJA STREET, LOHARIJOLA VILLAGE, BHAMINI MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532456 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETRIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PR DIVISION, PALAKONDA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532440 4. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PR DIVISION, PALAKONDA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532440 5. MANDAL ENGINEERING OFFICER, MPP, BHAMINI, SRIKAKUM,SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532456 6. THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, WORKS ACCOUNTS, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT- 532001. ...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 a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of final bill amount of Rs.2,21,658/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Eight only) as per the M-Book after all deductions, for the repair work at Vaddangi Road to Loharijola of Bhamini Mandal, done by the petitioner as per Agreement No. /18-19/dated 13-11- 2018 as illegal, unlawful, arbitrary, amounts to non-discharge of a legal obligation conferred on them and also violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith, pay the final bill amount of Rs.2,21,658/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Eight only) to the petitioner with respect to the work done by him under Agreement No. /18-19/dated 13-11-2018 and to 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 pay the final bill amount of Rs.2,21,658/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Eight only) to the petitioner forthwith for the work done by him under Agreement No. /18-19/dated 13-11-2018 pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MUNNANGI THANMAI KRISHNA 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 M.Thanmai Krishna, 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 withholding the payment of final bill amount of Rs.2,21,658/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Eight only) as per the M-Book after all deductions, for the repair work at Vaddangi Road to Loharijola of Bhamini Mandal, done by the petitioner as per Agreement No. /18-19/dated 13-11-2018, 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 3rd respondent. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works and the total value of the work done by the petitioner is Rs.2,67,562/- and after QC recovery of Rs.45,904/-, the net amount payable to the petitioner comes to Rs.2,21,658/-. 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.2,21,658/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors Vs. 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 the 3rd respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.2,21,658/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty One Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within two (02) 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 PVD 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400