Partly allowed

Pp Raju and Company v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Aug 2024WP/1131/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge disposed of a writ petition filed by a contractor for non-payment of a bill of Rs. 29 Lakhs. The Court held the non-payment arbitrary and directed respondents to release Rs. 28.51 Lakhs with 6% annual interest within three months, distinguishing the interest rate from the claim of 12%.

What did the court decide?

Order directing respondents to release Rs. 28,51,105 with 6% annual interest within three months.

Pp Raju and Company Vs The State of… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 1131 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s.PP Raju & Company, Rep, by its Managing partner,^{P.PeddiRaju,S/o} Penmatcha Supra Raju, Aged about 61 years, Occ: Contractor, Flat No402, Sri Sairam Estates, Ameerpet, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal^Secretary, Department of Finance and Planning, Secretariat Buildings,^Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal^Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Secretariat Buildings,^Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶13

The Managing Director, A.P.E.W.I.D.C, Vaddeswaram,^Tadepalli, Guntur District.

¶14

The Chief Engineer, A.P.E.W.I.D.C., Vijayawada.

¶15

Executive Engineer, A.P.E.W.I.D.C., Chittoor District.

¶16

The Pay and Accounts Officer, Works and Accounts,^{ChittoorDistrict.}

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus^{declaringtheactionof} the Respondents in withholding the admitted bill amount viz., for “Construction of BC Bhavan at Chittoor (V) and (M) in Chittoor District”,

¶19

Agreement No. /CE/APEWIDC/VIJ/2017-18, dated 07.06.2018 for an amount of Rs.29,02,110/- as illegal, arbitrary and^{violativeofArticle14and} 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith consider for payment of the amount of Rs.29,02,110/with interest @12%t per annum for the delayed amount to^{thepetitioner} in respect of execution of the above-mentioned work forthwith in terms of Agreements for “Construction of BC Bhavan at Chittoor (V) and (M) in Chittoor District”.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶21

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 to direct the respondents to forthwith consider for payment of Rs.29,02,110/- with interest @12% per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned^{worksforthwith} in terms of Agreement for "Construction of BC Bhavan at Chittoor (V) & (M) in Chittoor District", Agreement No. /CE/APEWIDCNIJ/2017-18, dated 07.06.2018 for an amount of Rs. 29,02,110/-.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. SARASWATHI PEETHALA

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 6: GP FOR FINANCE^&PLANNING " Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 to 5: SRI V. CH. NAIDU,^SCFOR

¶25

APEWIDC

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

APHC010004702024

¶28

0KS

¶29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶30

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

[3329]

¶32

TUESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 1131/2024

Between:

Pp Raju And Company

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶41

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶42

1.SARASWATHI PEETHALA

¶43

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶44

1.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶45

2.VCH NAIDU

¶46

GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶47

The Court made the following:

¶48

The petitioner had been awarded the contract of work(s)^under the subject scheme in Chittoor District. After execution of the said contract, a final bill was prepared for a sum of Rs.29,02,110/- as per the sanctioned orders. As the payment of the said amount^hasnot been made by the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this writ petition.

¶49

It is the contention of the petitioner that even though the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of the aforesaid sum 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.

¶50

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^ofdues is arbitrary and that such dues need to be cleared by the respondents at the earliest.

¶51

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Irrigation would submit that the concerned authority is not cooperating^tostate that the factual aspect with regard to payment of the bill amount, as such, neither instructions could be obtained nor counter affidavit is filed.

¶52

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Irrigation while admitting about the claim of the petitioner for^an amount of Rs.28,51,105/- and placed on record instructions received from the Executive Engineer, APEWIDC, Chittoor dated 06.08.2024. He would submit that, since the budget was not released by the Government, the bills were not paid to the petitioner. Soon after^release of the budget by the Government, the bills will be paid to the petitioner.

¶53

In view of the facts and circumstances submitted in the affidavit, and the directions of this Court in various cases and after hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner,^{thisWritPetitionis} disposed of with a direction to the respondents to^releasethe amount of Rs.28,51,105/- to the petitioner, along with the interest @ 6% per annum, in view of the judgment of the HonlDle Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021 and batch dated 12.10.2023, within a period of three (03) months weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It would also be open to the petitioner to agitate his claim for higher rate of interest, if any payable by the respondents, in an appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶54

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶55

//TRUE COPY//

¶56

SD/- K.J.RAJA BABU assistant/registrar

¶57

SECTK^ffe^FICER

¶58

To,

¶59

The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance and Planning, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi Guntur District.

¶60

The Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathii, Guntur District.

¶61

The Managing Director, A.P.E.W.i.D.C, Vaddeswaram, Tadepalli, Guntur District.

¶62

TheChiefEngineer, A.P.E.W.I.D.C., Vijayawada.

¶63

Executive Engineer, A.P.E.W.I.D.C. Chittoor District. 6. The Pay and Accounts Officer, Works and Accounts, Chittoor District. • 7. One CC to M/s. Saraswathi Peethala, Advocate [OPUC]

¶64

One CC to Sri V. Ch. Naidu, SC for APEWIDC[OPUC]

¶65

Two CCS to GP for Finance & Planning, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶66

Two CCs to GP for Social Welfare, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶67

Three CD Copies.

ssb

HIGH COURT

DATED:06/08/2024

ORDER WP.No.1131 of 2024

¶72

OF ANO/y^:^
O
rn
;,g 2 3 AUG 202A
. Current Section ^

¶73

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT CO^S

¶74

t \’

Pp Raju and Company v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pp Raju and Company 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B Parameswarudu Vs Sri Shashi Bhushan Kumar IAS

Chiriki Nooki Naidu Vs Sri.S.S.Rawat IAS

Kannuru Yerri Naidu Vs Sri S.S.Rawat, IAS

Sree Lakshmi Food Processors Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Vs The Secretary

Cherukuri Venkateswara Rao Vs The Union of India