APHC010390472026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] FRIDAY, THE 14th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 21166/2026 Between: 1. BUTHANURU RAMIREDDY, S/O. GANGIREDDY, AGED 57 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 5, ANKANA GODUGUNUR, MEKAVARIPALLE, KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 516228. ...PETITIONER A N D 1. THE STATE OF ANDHARA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522238 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522238 3. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT.520001 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ ENGINEERING CIRCLE, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT (EARLIER VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT).531024 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, PADERU, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT, (EARLIER VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT).531024 6. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PADERU MANDAL, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT, (EARLIER VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT).531024 7. SALUGU GRAM PANCHAYAT, PADERU MANDAL, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT (EARLIER VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT), REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY.531C)24 8. THE SARPANCH, SALUGU GRAM PANCHAYAT, PADERU MANDAL, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT (EARLIER VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT).531024 9. UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 1110001 SRK, J W.P.No.21166 of 2026 2 10. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT (EARLIER VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT).531024 ...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, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus for declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing an amount of Rs. 18,57,183/- to the petitioner towards the work executed by him under MGNREGS vide Work ID NO.037061014145G80009 for Formation of Road upto WBM Gr.ll surface including CD works from 12th Mile to Kakki Village of Salugu Gram Panchayat, Paderu Mandal, completed on 19.11.2019 and measured vide MB N0.882/PR/A, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to release the said amount of Rs. 18,57,183/- to the petitioner 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 leased to direct the respondents to release the amount of Rs. 18,57,183/- to the petitioner within a stipulated time, pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAMESH BABU TALLURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: SRK, J W.P.No.21166 of 2026 3 O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, and the learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat. 2. This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing an amount of Rs.18,57,183/- to the petitioner towards the work executed by him under MGNREGS vide Work ID No.037061014145080009 for formation of road up to WBM Gr.II surface including CD works from 12th Mile to Kakki village of Salugu Gram Panchayat, Paderu Mandal, completed on 19.11.2019 and measured vide MB No.882/PR/A, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents to release the said amount of Rs.18,57,183/- to the petitioner and pass such other order or orders …” 3. The petitioner claims to be a Civil Contractor. The 5th respondent sanctioned the work of formation of road up to WBM Gr.II Surface including CD works in road connectivity location from 12th Mile to Kakki Village of Salugu Gram Panchayat, Paderu Mandal under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) Grant with an estimated amount of Rs.50.00 lakhs; that as per the directions of the officials of 5th respondent, respondent Nos.7 and 8, the petitioner supplied requisite material and SRK, J W.P.No.21166 of 2026 4 executed the above work at the site, and no formal written agreement having been entered into, for the said work. The petitioner executed the work to the satisfaction of respondent authorities and completed the same on 19.11.2019, and the work was duly measured and recorded in Measurement Book No.882/PR/A. The respondent No.5 vide letter in Rc.No.01/DCC-EE PRI Paderu dated 02.02.2020 addressed to 3rd respondent, specifically stated that the petitioner executed the work under ID No.037061014145080009. (b) It is the grievance of the petitioner that though he executed the entire work within time, the respondent authorities kept pending the amount of Rs.18,57,183/-. Even though the petitioner approached the respondent authorities on multiple occasions, requesting for payment of aforesaid pending bill amount, they are not paying the said sum. According to petitioner, having executed the work satisfactorily, within the prescribed time, non-payment of the bill amount was arbitrary and unjustified. It was further contended that the delay in payment is causing severe financial hardship, necessitating the filing of the present Writ Petition seeking appropriate directions for release of the outstanding amount. 4. A perusal of the material on record goes to show that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the respondent SRK, J W.P.No.21166 of 2026 5 authorities assigned the contract work, as mentioned supra, to the petitioner. Grievance of the petitioner is that though he executed the said contract work within the stipulated time to the satisfaction of the respondent authorities, the respondent authorities are not releasing the payments covered under the bills that were submitted by the petitioner for the amount spent by him for executing the work. 5. The issue raised in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the Order of this Court in Rayapureddy Srinivasa Rao and others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government and others and others1 and batch in which the Writ Petitions are allowed with the following directions: (i) The Memo No.1263069/RD.II/A1/2020, dated 05.11.2020 and the Memo No.1388361/RD.II/A1/2020, dated 12.05.2021 issued by the Respondent NO.1 are set aside to the extent of deduction of 21.02% for DCC works and 6.333% for MCC works while making payment to the petitioner. (ii) The respondents are directed to clear the bills submitted by the petitioner and to release payment forthwith, in case no payment is made till date. (iii) In case, any part payment is made as on date, the remaining amount shall be paid to the petitioner forthwith. 1 2021 SCC Online AP 3084. SRK, J W.P.No.21166 of 2026 6 (iv) The respondents shall pay interest @ 12% per annum within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (v) The interest shall be compound from the date of expiry of one month from the date of submission of the bill by the petitioner to till the date of final payment. 6. Against the above said order, several Writ Appeals are filed and in one of the Writ Appeals (i.e.) Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021, a Division Bench of this Court has passed an interim Order, dated 18.11.2021 as extracted hereunder: “The direction of the learned Single Judge regarding payment of interest to the respondent No.1 as also setting aside the provision in Memo No.1263069/RD.II/A1/ 2020, dated 05.11.2020 and the Memo No.138861/RD.II/A1/ 2020, dated 12.05.2021 relating to deduction of 21.02% for DCC works and 6.333% for MCC works, while making payment, shall remained stayed. On a query of the Court, learned Advocate General submitted that the direction of the learned Single Judge as far as payment of the principal amount of the bills raised by the original writ petitioner, in terms of the order of the Division Bench in Krishna District Grama Panchayathi Sarpanchla Sangam (supra), shall be made within four weeks, if already not done. The matter be listed for hearing in due course. It is clarified that the appellants shall comply with the rest of the directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the judgment under appeal.” SRK, J W.P.No.21166 of 2026 7 7. Subsequently, a Division Bench of this Court headed by the Hon‟ble the Chief Justice while hearing the Writ Appeal Nos.740 and 741 of 2021, having considered the Order passed in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021, passed the following Order: “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the interim order passed by the Coordinate Bench, we direct that the said interim order shall apply for the present Writ Appeals also, however, with a condition that the appellants shall pay the principal amount of the bill raised by the original Writ Petitioners, within a period of four weeks, failing which the present interim order shall stand vacated without reference to the bench.” 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested the Court to clarify the applicability of the Memo No.1263069/RD.II/A1/ 2020, dated 05.11.2020 and the Memo No.138861/RD.II/A1/2020, dated 12.05.2021. 9. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj submitted that the said Memos are issued for the works executed under „Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme‟. Therefore, it is made clear that the Memo No.1263069/RD.II/A1/2020, dated 05.11.2020 and the Memo No.1388361/RD.II/A1/2020, dated 12.05.2021 are applicable to the SRK, J W.P.No.21166 of 2026 8 works executed under „Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme‟ only. 10. A perusal of the material on record goes to show that in spite of granting number of adjournments, the respondents neither secured written instructions nor filed counter-affidavits. Therefore, the respondent authorities are directed to verify and pay the admitted amount for the work executed by the petitioner within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. It is made clear that the petitioner shall execute an indemnity bond to the effect that in case, if it is found that the petitioner has not executed the work, he would repay the amount so paid. 11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY 14th August, 2026. DNB Whether the Order is: Speaking ✓ Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable ✓