Disposed

Uppu Venkatasamy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC11 Jul 2022WP/15839/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court directed respondent authorities to complete the verification of final bills for construction work within three weeks. Failure to do so mandates immediate payment of dues without further verification delay. Petitioner reserved right to claim interest separately.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to complete verification of final bill within three weeks; failure ensures payment without further delay.

Uppu Venkatasamy, Vs State of Andhra… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.15839 of 2022

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioner had been awarded the contracts for providing flooring, painting, doors and windows in first floor of High School situated at 15^th ward of Musunuru, Kavali Municipality, SPSR Nellore District vide Agreement No.238/2018-2019. After execution of the said work, a final bill for Rs.3,08,818/- had been prepared on the basis of Measurement Books and submitted to the concerned for payment. As the payment of the said amount has not been made by the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of this writ petition.

¶5

It is the contention of the petitioner that even though the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of the aforesaid sums of money, no payment is being made. The petitioner contends that such non-payment of money is clearly arbitrary and high-handed requiring the interference of this Court.

¶6

This Court, in various orders, including the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch had taken the view that such non-payment of dues is arbitrary and that such dues need to be cleared by the respondents at the earliest.

¶7

Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 5 submits that the respondent authorities are verifying the claims of the petitioner and would be in a

¶8

¶9

position to make payments only after such verification is completed.

¶10

In view of the aforesaid directions of this Court in various cases and after hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government pleader for Municipal Administration & Finance and Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 5, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to complete the verification process within a period of three weeks. It is clarified that in the event of the verification process not being completed within the aforesaid period of three weeks, the respondents shall pay the amounts due to the petitioner, without insisting upon any further time for verification. It would also be open to the petitioner to agitate his/her/their claim for interest, if any payable by the respondents, in an appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

____________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

¶13

11.07.2022 RJS

¶14

¶15

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶16

WRIT PETITION No.15839 of 2022

¶17

RJS

¶18

11.07.2022

Uppu Venkatasamy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uppu Venkatasamy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Chetan Raju Pilla Vs Union of India

Chakali Venkateswarudu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G. Thulasamma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Venigalla Siva Prasad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kilari Madhava Rao Vs G.K.Dwivedi

Adapala Ramu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh