APHC010155342026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] WEDNESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 8636/2026 Between: 1. DIVIJA CONSTRUCTIONS, REP BY ITS DIRECTOR RAMANJANEYAREDDYLOMADA S/O JALLA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS FLAT NO. 4/2-B, K RAJUPALLI VILLAGE, CHAKRAYAPET MANDAL, YSR DISTRICT KADAPA-516259 . ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, A.P SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.-522238 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING A.P SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.-522238 3. THE ANDHRA PRADESH COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CFMS, CEO, NIDHI BHAVAN, APIIC PARK, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522503 4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S DIVISION, PULIVENDULA, YSR KADAPA. - 516390 5. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S, SUB-DIVISION, PULIVENDULA, YSR KADAPA. - 516390 ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 SRK, J WP.No.8636 of 2026 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 or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the admitted due amount of Rs. 10,89,509/- (Ten lakh eighty nine thousand five hundred nine) payable to petitioner in relation to One Work executed for 4th respondent by the petitioner herein under Agreements Bearing No's /2023- 24 Dt. 21-08-2023 even after finalizing the bills, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents herein to immediately pay the due amount of Rs 10,89,509/- (Ten lakh eighty nine thousand five hundred nine) payable to the petitioner in relation to One Work executed for 4th respondent under Agreements Bearing No /2023-24 Dt. 21- 08-2023 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 direct the respondents herein to release the due amount of Rs. 10,89,509/- (Ten lakh eighty nine thousand five hundred nine ) payable to the petitioner in relation to One Work executed for 4th respondent under Agreements Bearing No: /2023-24 Dt. 21-08-2023 within a stipulated time frame and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. LAKSHMI NANDINI KUDARI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: 3 SRK, J WP.No.8636 of 2026 O R D E R This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the admitted due amount of Rs.10,89,509/- payable to petitioner in relation to one work executed for 4th respondent by the petitioner herein under Agreements Bearing No's /2023-24 Dt. 21-08-2023 even after finalizing the bills, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents herein to immediately pay the due amount of Rs 10,89,509/- payable to the petitioner in relation to One Work executed for 4th respondent under Agreements Bearing No /2023-24 Dt. 21-08-2023 and pass such other order…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development. 3. The petitioner claims to be engaged in the execution of civil works and that it was entrusted with various works of the Panchayat Raj Department and the Roads & Buildings Department on a tender basis. It is its case that it was awarded a contract for execution of the works viz. Augmentation of PWS Scheme to Avulavandlapalli under Agreement bearing Nos. /2023-24, dated 21.08.2023. It is its case that it deposited the requisite security amount and executed the works to the satisfaction of the authorities concerned, and upon completion of the works, the respondent authorities measured the same and recorded the measurements in the Measurement Books. 4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that notwithstanding the completion of the works and its measurement by the competent authorities, the amount due towards the executed works has not been paid till date. According to the petitioner, although the works were completed long back, the respondent authorities are not releasing the admitted amount payable to it. Aggrieved by the non-payment of the said amount, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. 4 SRK, J WP.No.8636 of 2026 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, on written instructions, received from the Executive Engineer, RWS & S Division, Pulivendula-4th respondent, submits that there is no dispute with regard to the execution of the subject works by the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is entitled to an amount of Rs.10,89,509/- after statutory deductions of Rs.1,03,805/-. He further submits that the work bill for a total amount of Rs.11,93,314/- was passed by the Executive Engineer, RWS & S Division, Pulivendula, and was uploaded to the CFMS on 17.03.2024 vide CFMS Token No.2023-2692199. Thereafter, the bill was migrated to the Financial Year 2024–25 vide CFMS Token No.2024-173132. However, on the closure of the Financial Year 2024–25, the status of the bill was shown as "Bill returned to DDO as per Articles 39 and 50 of the A.P. Financial Code, Volume I." He further submits that, owing to the non-release of budgetary allocation to the Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO), the bill could not be raised in the Nidhi Portal. The written instructions are placed on record. 6. 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.” 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1400 5 SRK, J WP.No.8636 of 2026 7. Having regard to the fact that there is no dispute with regard to the works executed by the petitioner and the amount payable to it, and in view of the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, the respondent authorities are directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,89,509/- to the petitioner within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Date: 22.07.2026. MS 6 SRK, J WP.No.8636 of 2026 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Writ Petition No:8636 of 2026 Date: 22.07.2026 MS