The High Court heard a writ petition and a miscellaneous application seeking payment of a contract balance. The petitioner withdrew both petitions with liberty to file fresh ones, and the Court dismissed them accordingly.
Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; liberty granted to file fresh petition; no order for costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
V
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATL
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY. THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL ■ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
ffe i
uo I
uo
-O'
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
WRIT PETITION NO: 42013 OF 2022
Between:
M/s. R Gangaiah and Co., Rep. by its Managing Partner R Gangaiah, S/o.Late R Gangaiah, Aged about 69 years. Occ Contractor. R/o. 8-3-948/949, Flat No.401. Sanali Heavens, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents not releasing the part payment of balance amount Rs.22,31,234/- vide M Book No. 4979, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e.. Construction of Tissue culture lab at sugar cane research station, Vuyyuru of Krishna District, vide Agreement No. MD/LS/DEE-IV/147/2020-21, dated 09.09.2020 is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay the part payment of balance amount of Rs.22;31,234/- vide M Book No. 4979 with interest @24 percentage per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work forthwith.
V
/
lA NO: 1 OF 2022
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. BATHALA RAMESH
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI YELLAREDDY RAJANALA, SC FOR ANGRAU
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
WRIT PETITION No.42013 of 2022
ORDER;-
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, there are several
errors/mistakes.
Subsequently, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo for withdrawal of the writ petition with a liberty to file a fresh writ petition.
Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to
such liberty.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
with the aforesaid liberty. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending,
shall also stand closed.
/
/
<br>
To,
Sd/- K.J.RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
HIGH COURT
/ -r."
■ • ■■< •: Y.
DATED:03/04/2023
ORDER
WP.No.42013 of 2022
0 9 AL'3 2023
Current Section . '
DISMISSING OF THE WP AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. R Gangaiah and Co. Rep. by its Managing Partner R Gangaiah
The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Finance and Planning
The Managing Director, AP State Police Housing Corporation
The Chief Engineer, AP State Police Housing Corporation
The General Manger, AP State Police Housing Corporation
The Executive Engineer, APSPHC Ltd Vijayawada
Ravi Nath Tilhari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
