Allowed

Rongali Gangathalli v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Mar 2024WP/3566/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the respondents to release Rs. 2,97,909/-, an admitted bill for executed school works, within three months. The petition challenging non-payment was disposed of with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Direct the respondents to release admitted bill amount Rs.2,97,909/- as expeditiously as possible preferably within three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Rongali Gangathalli Vs the State of Ap — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

APHC010062312024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3333]

¶5

WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 3566/2024

Between:

Rongali Gangathalli

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of A.P. and Others

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶16

1.RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶18

GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP)

¶19

GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP)

¶20

REVANURU SUDHA RANI (SC FOR SAMAGRA SHIKSHA)

¶21

GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶22

REVANURU SUDHA RANI (SC FOR SAMAGRA SHIKSHA)

¶23

REVANURU SUDHA RANI (SC FOR SAMAGRA SHIKSHA)

¶24

REVANURU SUDHA RANI (SC FOR SAMAGRA SHIKSHA)

¶25

REVANURU SUDHA RANI (SC FOR SAMAGRA SHIKSHA)

¶26

REVANURU SUDHA RANI (SC FOR SAMAGRA SHIKSHA)

¶27

10.REVANURU SUDHA RANI (SC FOR SAMAGRA SHIKSHA)

¶28

The Court made the following:

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in not releasing the payments for the works i.e., i) Construction of Kitchen Shed to ZPH School at Giriprasadnagar Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District through the M.Book No. B/159/14-15 for an amount of Rs. 57,330/-, ii) Major Repairs work to M.P.P. School at Mahalakshmi Nagar in Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District through the M.Book No. 578-B/2009-10/RVM/SSA/VSP for an amount of Rs. 51,435/- and Construction of 6 Additional Class Rooms to ZPH School at Shanti Nagar Village in Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District through the M.Book No. A/187/15-16 for an amount of Rs.1,89,144/- totaling an amount of Rs. 2,97,909/- as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent authorities to release Rs. 2,97,909/- for the above said works executed by the petitioner.

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶32

At the time of hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the Samagra Shiksha produced a copy of instructions of the Additional Project Coordinator, A.P. Samagra Shiksha, Visakhapatnam dated 09.02.2024, wherein they have admitted the amount payable to the petitioner to the extent of Rs.2,97,909/- and as such requested the State Project Director A.P. Samagra Shiksha, Amaravati to release the said amount to the District Project Office, A.P., Samagra Shiksha, Visakhapatnam for payment of the

¶33

said amount towards the works done by the petitioner, which fact was also admitted by the learned Government Pleader for Finance and Planning.

¶34

In view of the above instructions, since the bill amount claimed by the petitioner is an admitted bill, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondents to release admitted bill amount Rs.2,97,909/-, payable to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶36

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

¶37

____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶38

Date : 13.03.2024 Pnr

Rongali Gangathalli v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rongali Gangathalli 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Palakurthi Siva Kumar Vs Kantilal Dande IAS

Rongali Gangathalli Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Syamatam Dhanalakshmi Vs the State of Ap

A.Rajavelu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep: by its Principal Secretary

Ponanna and Sons Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr. B. Venkatesh Yalamarthi, W.G.Dist Vs Registrar, Dr.Ntr University of Health Sciences, Krishna and 2