Disposed

V.J.Thukaram v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Feb 2024WP/249/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contractor sought release of withheld payment of Rs.1,76,915 for a completed borewell drilling work under M.Book No.34 of Chittoor Municipal Corporation. Respondents acknowledged the net amount was payable due to paucity of funds; the court disposed of the writ petition directing payment within three months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to pay petitioner net Rs.1,76,915 within three months from the order, on priority basis; no costs.

V.J.Thukaram Vs The State of Andhra… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

o
sV

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 249 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

V.J.Thukaram, S/o V.Janardhan, age 58 years, Occ: Contractor, R/o H.No.21273/1e, Lakshmi Nagar Colony Road, B.V.Reddy Colony, Chittoor, Chittoor District.

¶10

...Petitioner

¶11

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development, Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi, Amaravathi.

¶13

The Director, Municipal Administration State of Andhra Pradesh

¶14

Guntur.

¶15

The District Collector(MuncipalCorpn. Wing) Chittoor District at Chittoor.

¶16

The Chittoor Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner at Chittoor, Chittoor District.

¶17

The Executive Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Chittoor, Chittoor District.

¶18

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance &Planning, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi.

¶19

...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated i 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 declaring the action of

¶20

¶21

the respondents in non-compliance of payment of Rs. 1,76,915/- as per the M.Book No.34, dated 03-06-2022, including quality control holding \ amounts, for the works done by the petitioner for I submit that the respondent authorities identified the works particularly for drilling of new borewell in Balaji Nagar, 25*^Division in Chittoor Municipal Corporation, Chittoor District, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice, contrary to the Rules & Regulations there under and consequently direct the respondents to pay an amount of Rs.1,76,915/-as per the M.Book No.34, dated 03-06-2022, including quality control holding amounts.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶23

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 issue pass order^{foranamountof} Rs.1,76,915/-, under the M.Book No.34, dated 03-06-2022, including quality control holding amounts, enable the authorities to pay the same to the petitioner, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. K V L NARASIMHA RAO

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP MUNCIPAL

¶26

ADMNISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AP

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI K.SURESH KUMAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.6: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER

¶28

¶29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI

¶30

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶31

WRIT PETITION No.249 of 2024

¶32

V.J. Thukaram, S/o V. Janardhan, aged 58 years, Occ: Contractor, R/o H.No.2-1273/le, Lakshmi Nagar Colony Road, B.V. Reddy Colony, Chittoor, Chittoor District.

¶33

... Petitioner

¶34

Versus

¶35

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration d& Urban Development, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi and five others.

¶36

... Respondents

¶37

Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K.V.L. Narasimha Rao Counsel for respondents : GP for Municipal Administration and Urban Development; GP for Revenue; GP for Finance and Sri K. Suresh Kumar Reddy, standing counsel

¶38

ORDER

¶39

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents in withholding an amount of Rs. 1,76,915/- payable

¶40

to the petitioner in relation to execution of work i.e “Drilling of bore well in Balajai Nagar Colony, Div.No.25”, as illegal^and arbitrary.

¶41

Page 2 of 4

¶42

SRS^ J W.P.No.249af2024

¶43

¶44

The case of the petitioner is that inspite of completion^of the above work, as per M. Book No.34, amount was not released. Hence, the writ petition.

¶45

Heard Sri P. Samuel Sanjay, learned counsel representing Sri K.V.L.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner,^Sri Anand Surya, learned counsel representing Sri K. Suresh^Kumar Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.4^and5.

¶46

Learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5, on instructions of Commissioner, Chittoor Municipal Corporation, would submit that petitioner is entitled to net amount of Rs. 1,76,915/- (gross amount of Rs. 1,87,983/-). He^wouldalso submit that due to paucity of funds, amount was not paid to the petitioner and the amount will be paid within three^months.

¶47

Learned counsel for the petitioner endorsed with regard^to the net amount payable to the petitioner.

¶48

In view of the above, since there is no dispute regarding execution of work and net amount payable to the petitioner,^this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the

¶49

Page 3 of 4

¶50

SRSJ W.P.No.249 of 2024

¶51

¶52

net amount of Rs. 1,76,915/- to the petitioner, within^{aperiod of} three months from today, on priority basis. No costs.

¶53

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any,^shall stand dismissed.

¶54

//TRUE COPY//

¶55

SD/- K J RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /^SECffON OFFICER

¶56

¶57

The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,^State of Andhra Pradesh.

¶58

The Director, Municipal Administration, State of Andhra Pradesh, Guntur.

¶59

The District Collector(MuncipalCorpn. Wing), Chittoor District at Chittoor.

¶60

The Chittoor Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner^at Chittoor, Chittoor District.

¶61

The Executive Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Chittoor, Chittoor District.

¶62

The Principal Secretary, Finance & Planning, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,. State of Andhra Pradesh.(Addressee^Nos. 1 to 6 BY RPAD)

¶63

One CC to Sri K.V.L.Narasimha Rao, Advocate [OPUC]

A ... 'J U

Two CCs to GP Muncipal Admnistration and Urban Development High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶69

Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶70

10.Two CCs to GP for Finance and Planning, High Court^ofAndhra

¶71

Pradesh [OPUC]

¶72

11.One CC to Sri K. Suresh Kumar Reddy, Standing Counsel [OPUC] 12.Two C.D Copies

MBT

» s

HIGH COURT

DATED:19/02/2024

ORDER

C5'
rn
O 18 JUL 2024 Co
i(
£^SPATCVi'&3

¶79

WP.No.249 of 2024

¶80

DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

V.J.Thukaram v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.J.Thukaram 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudeeksha Educational Society, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mamilla Ravindranath Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

P.Padmasree, Kurnool Dist. Vs I.V.R. Krishna Rao, I.A.S.

V J Thukaram Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Ananda Constructions Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Ananda Constructions Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh