1 APHC010144472026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 7962/2026 Between: 1. M/S MYB SECURITY SERVICES, REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MASA YESUBABU, S/O MASA SUBBARAO, AGED 63 YEARS, RIO D.NO.16-23-313C, CHITTIRAJU COLONY, ROAD NO.1, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR-522238. 2. 2. THE KAKINADAMUNICIPALCORPORATION, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER,KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT-533001. 3. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KAKINADA, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KAKINADA DISTRICT-533001. 4. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2 1. M Krishna Rao SC for skl vzm kkd Municipal Corporations 2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Ms. Devasri Roshan K, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri M. Srinu Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development, Ms. D. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance & Planning and Ms. Ch. Naga Jyothi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri M. Krishna Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Kakinada Municipal Corporation. 2. Ms. Ch. Naga Jyothi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri M. Krishna Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Kakinada Municipal Corporation, has submitted the Written Instruction furnished by the Commissioner, Kakinada Municipal Corporation. Copy of it is supplied to the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and the same is taken on record. 3. The Written Instruction would indicate that the amounts are yet to be paid for an extended period of three months i.e., from 01.07.2023 to 30.09.2023. The Written Instruction would also indicate that the amounts have already been paid for a period of 15 months. The Commissioner is seeking three (3) months’ time. 4. The above facts would indicate that the extended period of three months was also completed by 30.09.2023 and therefore, the Respondents have unreasonably withheld an amount of Rs.3,80,000/- for this extended period. In this view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant three months’ time. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this Writ Petition with a direction to the Respondent Nos.2 to 4, to complete the entire administrative process, both 3 inter-departmental and intra-departmental, by way of mutual cooperation and coordination, within a period of three (3) weeks from today and transfer the due amount to the bank account of the Writ Petitioner within one week thereafter. 6. Writ Petitioner is directed to submit the bank account details to the Competent Authority within two (2) weeks from today for effective compliance. 7. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No order as to costs. 8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt:06.04.2026 Vns