Dismissed

Munimohan Reddy and Co. v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC6 Apr 2022WP/1839/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a writ petition challenging the withholding of payment for government works. The court was satisfied upon counsel submissions that the bills were cleared and payment made, rendering no further adjudication necessary, and accordingly closed the petition. No costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is closed with no order as to costs.

Munimohan Reddy and Co. Vs The State… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO.1839 of 2022

¶3

O R D E R:

¶4

This Writ Petition has been filed against the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of amount Rs.37,35,141/- (CFMS No.2021-728315) including deposits in respect of work “Repairs and Renovations to Medical Officers quarters, Staff Nurse quarters and Class IV employee quarter of PHC at KVB Puram in Chittoor District (3^rd call), vide agreement No.56/APMSIDC/2018-19 dated 04.10.2018” even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner is questioned as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of Rs.37,35,141/- (CFMS No.2021-728315) including deposits with interest @ 24% per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above mentioned work forthwith and pass such other order or orders.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Education, Sri Chittem Venkata Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.3,4 and 5 and the learned Government Pleader for Finance and Planning appearing for the 6^th respondent.

¶6

On instructions, the learned Government Pleader for Finance submitted that on 31.03.2022, the bills submitted by

¶7

¶8

the petitioner on 09.06.2021 are cleared and the payments are made to the petitioner.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner also accepted the payment and further submitted that he is satisfied with the payment and no adjudication is required in this case.

¶10

In view of the above submissions made by the respective counsel, in the considered opinion of this Court, no further adjudication is required in this case.

¶11

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed.

¶12

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed.

¶14

JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶15

Date:06.04.2022 tm

¶16

¶17

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶18

WRIT PETITION No.1839 of 2022

¶19

Dt.06-04-2022

¶20

Munimohan Reddy and Co. v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munimohan Reddy and Co. v. The 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

Marisetti Manikyala Rao Vs Sri. Gopala Krishna Dwivedi, I.A.S.

Marisetti Manikyala Rao Vs Gopala Krishna Dwivedi,I.a.S

K. Venkateswara Rao, Vs Sri Gopal Krishna Dwivedi

P. Usha, Chennai and 79 Ot Vs Prl. Secy., Higher Edn Dept., Hyd and Anr.

Vandanapu Hari Krishna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Jasti Venkatapathi Rao Vs M.T. Krishna Babu