Dismissed

Veerla Veera Kalidasu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Apr 2024WP/16975/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contractor sought release of a final bill for irrigation works under an agreement. Counsel sought leave to withdraw the writ petition; the court permitted withdrawal and dismissed the petition with liberty to file afresh.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh writ petition; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Veerla Veera Kalidasu Vs the State… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR ^

¶3

'w
>3

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶6

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 16975 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Veerla Veera Kalidasu, S/o. Lakshmaiah Aged about 60^years,Occ. Contractor, R/o. D.No. 1-171, Kondiparru Village, Pamarru Mandal, Krishna District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary to Government Irrigation and CAD Water Resources Department, Secretariat Buildings, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi,^{Amaravathi,Guntur} District.

¶13

The District Collector (Irrigation Wing), Krishna^{DistrictatChallapalli.}

¶14

The Engineer-in-Chief Minor and Major Irrigation Department Government of Andhra Pradesh, Irrigation Bhavan, Vijayawada,^N.T.R. District, previously Krishna District.

¶15

¶16

The Superintending Engineer, Superintending Engineer Irrigation & Water Resources Department, Irrigation Circle Office, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District., previously Krishna District.

¶17

The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department,^K.C.Division , « Vijayawada, N.T.R. District, Previously Krishna^District.

¶18

The Commissioner, Command Development Authority (CAD) Water Resources Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada.

¶19

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

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ,^{Orderordirectionmore} particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the inaction on part of the respondents herein not releasing the final bill amount worth of Rs.9,44,157/- Agreement No.88/2020-21, dated 22.08.2020,^{withinterestof} execution and completion of Irrigation works under Irrigation Department as per agreement, to the petitioner till today and causing heavy loss with interest even though total work was completed as per the agreement as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16^and21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents releasing the final bill of total amount worth of Rs.9,44,1571- for execution of completion of Irrigation works under Irrigation Department as per agreement to the petitioner forthwith.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave by condoning the delay in filing of the counter affidavit and allow the same to come on record, else, this respondent and Government will suffer irreparable loss and injury.

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents releasing the Final Bill amount of Rs.9,44,1571- Agreement No.8812020-21, dated 22.08.2020, for execution of completion of Irrigation works under Irrigation Department as per agreement to the petitioner forthwith, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. PAMARTHI KAMESWARA RAO

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 6: GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP)

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No. 7: GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

¶31

APHC010331432023

¶32

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶33

[3329]

¶34

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶35

TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶36

PRESENT

¶37

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶38

WRIT PETITION NO: 16975/2023

¶39

¶40

Between:

¶41

Veerla Veera Kalidasu

¶42

...PETITIONER

¶43

AND

¶44

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶45

...RESPONDENT{S)

¶46

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶47

1.PAMARTH1 KAMESWARA RAO

¶48

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶49

1.GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP)

¶50

2.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶51

The Court made the following:

¶52

ORDER:

¶53

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission^ofthis Court to withdraw the Writ Petition.

¶54

Permission as sought for is accorded.

¶55

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh Writ Petition. No costs.

¶56

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending^shallstand

¶57

closed.

¶58

Sd/- B. PRASADA RAO //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION FICER

¶59

To,

¶60

One CC to SRI. PAMARTHI KAMESWARA RAO, Advocate [OPUC]

¶61

Two CCs to GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP), High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶62

Two CCs to GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING, High Court^{of Andhra} Pradesh. [OUT]

¶63

Three CD Copies

csb

^ %

csb

HIGH COURT

DATED:02/04/2024

ORDER

WP.No.16975 of 2023

m,.
i 10 OCT m
O s)
^ Current Seciion ^ '>
patcv"'^-^

¶73

DISMISSING THE WP AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

Veerla Veera Kalidasu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerla Veera Kalidasu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J Sree Devi Vs Shashi Bhushan Kumar IAS

Pogadadanda Nagamalleswara Rao Vs the State of Ap

Rayalaseema Life Saving Drugs, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kilarapu Srinivasa Rao Vs the State of Ap

Katamgari Venkateswarlu, Spsr Nellore Dist and 29 Others Vs Dist Collector, Spsr Nellore and 7 Others

S Vedhavathi Vs S S Rawat