Allowed

The Water Users Association -34 v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Apr 2024WP/1479/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Writ Petition filed by a Water Users Association sought a writ of mandamus directing the State to pay withheld contract bill amounts totaling Rs. 6,36,331 along with interest. The petitioner contended the delay was arbitrary. As Respondents failed to file a counter affidavit, the Court disposed of the petition directing payment.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Respondents to release the amount of Rs.6,36,331 along with interest @ 6% per annum within six weeks from the receipt of this order.

The Water Users Association -34 Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMM^Ma

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 1479 OF 9n9d

¶6

Between:

¶7

The Water Users Association -34, Revanur Village, Rep. by its President, R.C.Narasimha Reddy, S/o. Siva Nagi Reddy, Aged about 72 years, Occ Contractor, R/o. Revanur Village, Koilkuntia Mandal, Nandyal District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of AP, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department,

¶11

Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi Village, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶12

The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, KC Canal Division, Nandyal, Kumool District.

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi Village, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may

¶16

be pleased ,o issue an order or direotion or Writ more perticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of respondents in not taking steps to pay 7.5 % of Withheld Amount (W.H.A.) in respect of Agreement Nos. 1384/2017 -18, Rs.71,156/1386/2017-18. Rs.71.478/1284/2017-18. Rs.70.032/-. 1402/201718. Rs.71,504/-, 1392/2017-18 ,/;Rs.6P.819/-. 1287/2017-18. Rs.71,490/654/2017-18, 653^017-18. Rs.71.023/Rs. 71.842/-, 1280/2017-18, Rs.70,987/ totaling an amount ■ - ot Rs.6,36,331/as arbitrary, illegal and i in violation of Article 19(l)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith pay an amount of Rs.6,36,331/ - which were retained by the respondents.

¶17

jA NO: 1 OF 9no/|

¶18

Petition under Section 15i ppr' stated in ,he affidavit filed in support of the plon'Ihe Court may be Pleased to direct the Respondents pay 7.5% withheld amount (W H A ) in respect of Agreement Nos. Rs.71,478/1384/2017-18, Rs.71,156/-, 1386/2017-18 1284/2017-18 1392/2017-18 Rs.70,032/-, 1402/2017-18, Rs.71,504/-, Rs.66,819/-, 1287/2017-18, Rs.71,490/-, 654/2017-18 Rs.71,842/-, 653/2017 of Rs.6,36,331/-18, Rs.71,023/-, 1280/2017-18, Rs,70,987/- totaling pending disposal of the Writ Petition. ^

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. C PRAKASH REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 to 2: GP FOR |RR| and CAD Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING

¶21

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶22

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶23

WRIT PETITION No. 1479 of 2024

¶24

ORDER;

¶25

The petitioner had been awarded the contract of work(s) under the subject scheme in Kurnool District. After^executionof the said contract, a final bill was prepared for a sum of Rs.6,36,331/- as per the sanctioned orders. As the^paymentof the said amount has not been made by the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this^{writpetition.}

¶26

It is the contention of the petitioner that even though^the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled^forpaymentof 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^ofthisCourt. of a 3. This Court, in various orders, including the judgment learned Single Judge of this Court dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No. 10038 of 2021 and batch had taken the view^thatsuch non-payment of dues is arbitrary and that such dues^needtobe cleared by the respondents at the earliest.

¶27

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Irrigation would submit that the concerned authority is not cooperating^to

¶28

y 2

¶29

^‘ate that the factual aspect with regard to payment of the bill amount, as such, neither i instructions could be counter affidavit is filed. obtained nor 5. Hence, i in the absence of filing any counter affidavit/written instructions by the respondents, the right of the respondents to file counter affidavit is forfeited and this Court i IS left with option, no other except to proceed further without counter affidavit, despite granting several adjournments to the respondents to file affidavit/written i counter instructions. 6. In view of the facts and ci circumstances submitted in the affidavit, and the directions of this Court i in various cases hearing the submissions and after of learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition i IS disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the amount of Rs.6,36,331/the interesti @ 6% to the petitioner, along with Per annum, in view of the i judgment of the Hon hie Division Bench of this Court i in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021 and batch dated 12. 10.2023, within the date of a period of six (06) weeks from receipt of a copy of this order. It would also be the petitioner open to to agitate his claim for high er rate of interest, if any

¶30

¶31

payable by the respondents, in an appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶32

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending^inthis Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶33

Sd/- U.SRI DEVI //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶34

/--SECtlON OFFICER

¶35

To,

¶36

The Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department,^{StateOfAP,Secretariat} Buildings, Nelapadu Village, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶37

The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, KC Canal Division, Nandyal, Kumool District.

¶38

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat Buildings, Nelapadu Village,^{Amaravati,Guntur} District.

¶39

One CC to SRI. C PRAKASH REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶40

Two CCs to GP For Irrigation Aand CAD, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶41

Two CCs to GP for Finance & Planning, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶42

Three CD Copies

PRK

. J

HIGH COURT

DATED:04/04/2024

*•

• I

ORDER

WP.No.1479 of 2024

1 2 SEP 20?'»
^ Current Section

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE WP, WITHOUT COSTS

The Water Users Association -34 v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Water Users Association -34 v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K Siva Sankar Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Nutheti Ramanaiah Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Athipalli Sivaprasad Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Heights Communications (India) Private Limited Vs the State of Ap

Vungarala Lakshmi Narasimha Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Nas Babu Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Ap