The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking mandamus for payment of outstanding bill amounts as infructuous because the cause for adjudication no longer existed.
The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT ^ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGAD^
WRIT PETITION NO: 17922 OF 2024
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
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 a Writ, Order, or Direction more particularly
one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the payments for the works i.e., Special repairs to Udayapuram to Mondemkhallu road from km 0/0 to 4/270 in Vizianagaram District for an amount of Rs. 21,04,664/- towards second and final Bill as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to release Rs. 21,04,664/towards Second and final Bill forthwith for the above said works executed by the petitioner. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 :
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to consider for payment of amount of Rs. 21,04,664/-towards second and final Bill for the pending bills for the works executed by the petitioner i.e.. Special repairs to Udayapuram to Mondemkhalluroadfrom km 0/0 to 4/270 in Vizianagaram District for an amountofRs.21,04,664/- towards second and final Bill forthwith, pending disposalofthemainWrit Petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K DIWAKAR REDDY REPRESENTING SRI K NARSI REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents No. 1,3,4,5 : GP FOR ROADS&BUILDINGS Counsel for the Respondents No.2 : GP FOR FINANCE &PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER
■V
T3S:
APHC010350162024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH 0!¥iB AT AMARAVATI [3329] (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 17922/2024
Between:
Sundeep Ravindra Engineers And Contractors ...PETITIONER(S) and Others
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT{S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.KNARSI REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS
2.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING
The Court made the following:
or
'A,
?;ri .IUSTICE VFNKATESWARLU nimmagadda THE HON’BLE
WRIT PETITQN NQ.17922 OF 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending
shall stand closed.
Sd/- U.SRI DEVI //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
SECfroKToFFICER
To,
- One CC to Sri K Narsi Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]
- Two CCs to GP for Roads & Buildings, High Court OfAndhraPradesh. [OUT]
- Two CCs to GP for Finance & Planning, High Court ofAndhraPradesh. [OUT]
- Three CD Copies skn
HIGH COURT DATED:25/09/2024
ORDER
WP.No.17922 of 2024
%
ag 2 7 DEC 202'j
CO;
Current Sectiobn ,
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives further adjudication.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Sundeep Ravindra Engineers And Contractors
The State of Andhra Pradesh
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
