Disposed

P Divaker Reddy v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Jan 2024WP/386/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contractor sought release of a withheld final bill amount of Rs.3,87,252/- for sewer pipeline works at a KGBV under APSSA/Samagra Shiksha funds for 2018-2019. The respondents admitted the amount was due; the court directed payment within six weeks and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to release Rs.3,87,252/- to petitioner within six weeks; misc. petitions closed; no costs.

P Divaker Reddy Vs the State of Ap — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 386 OF ?n?4

¶7

Between:

¶8

P. Divaker Reddy, S/o. P. Aswanth r Reddy, Aged about 45years, R/o Chilamathur Village and Mandal, Satya Sai/Anantapur District ...PETITIONER AND

¶9

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Education , Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶10

The State Project Director San/a Sikshya Abhiyan , Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶11

The Executive Engineer, APSSA, Anantapur, Anantapur District,

¶12

The Super-indent Engineer, APSSA, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 5. The Deputy Executive Engineer, APSSA, Hindupur Sub Division, Satya

¶13

Sai District/Anantapur District

¶14

Special Officer/ Head Master KGBV, ‘ Chilamathur Chilamathur Village

¶15

AND Mandal,. Satya Sai/Anantapur District.

¶16

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Department of Finance, Seeretariat Buiidings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the

¶18

of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents withholding the payment of final bill amount 3,87.252/- final bill amount i * in respect of works of rupees after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner for even the year 2018-2019 A.P.S.S.A Funds as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the final bill amount of rupees 3,87.252/- bill amounts in respect of work S to the petitioner in respect of work. lA NO: 1 OF 909^

¶19

Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to take steps for paying the final bill amount of rupees 3,87,252/-iin respect of works final to the petitioner amount bill due to the pending disposal of the V/rit Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. nagaraju pullagura Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondents No.2 to 5: M/s. R. SUDHA RANI, SC FOR SARVA SIKSHYA ABHIYAN Counsel for the Respondent No.6: Counsel for the Respondent No.7: GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.386 of 2024

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following^relief:-

¶24

... to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly^one in the of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents withholding the payment of final bill amount of Rs.3,87,252/- in respect of works even after finalizing^the bills, payable to the petitioner for even the year^2018-2019 A.P.S.S.A. Funds as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and conseguently^direct the respondents to pay the final bill amount of Rs.3,87,252/bill amounts in respect of work to the petitioner....”

¶25

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

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of the aforesaid sum of money, no payment is being made and such non-payment of money is clearly arbitrary^and high-handed and thereby requires interference by this^Court.

¶27

¶28

At the time of hearing, the learned Standing Counsel^for Samagra Shiksha, has submitted a copy of instructions of the Executive Engineer-3'''^ respondent, vide Lr.Rc.No.l267/B4/KGBV’s/CW/APSS/2023, dated 18.01.2024, wherein it is stated as follows:

¶29

“....The concerned Deputy Executive Engineer has submitted part bill along with Mbook No.1854/2018-19 to a tune of Rs.3,98,870.00 (Rupees Three Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Only) and in that the net^amount of Rs.3,87,252.00 (Rupees Three Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Two only) is to be released to the School account and the recoveries amount of Rs. 11,618.00 (Rupees Eleven Thousand Six Hundred and Eighteen Only) to be released to the Additional Project^Co ordinator account towards the work Providing Sewer Pipe Line to KGBV Chilamathuru (V) & (M) in the Ananthapuramu District. ”

¶30

In view of the above instructions submitted by the^learned Standing Counsel for Samagra Shiksha, since the bill^amount claimed by the petitioner is an admitted bill, this^Courtfeels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to release amount of Rs.3,87,252/- (Rupees three lakhs eighty seven thousand two hundred and fifty two only) to the petitioner within a period of six (6) weeks from^the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31

¶32

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

¶33

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ

¶34

Petition shall stand closed.

¶35

SD/- B. PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary, Department of Education State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶40

The State Project Director Sarva Sikshya Abhiyan,^Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶41

The Executive Engineer, APSSA, Anantapur, Anantapur^District.

¶42

The Super-indent Engineer, APSSA, Anantapur, Anantapur^District.

¶43

The Deputy Executive Engineer, APSSA, Hindupur Sub Division, Satya Sai District/Anantapur District

¶44

Special Officer/ Head Master KGBV, Chilamaihur Chilamalhur Village AND Mandal,. Satya Sai/Anantapur District.

¶45

The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, State of Andhra Pradesh, Seeretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶46

One CC to SRI NAGARAJU PULLAGURA Advocate [OPUC]

¶47

Two CCs to GP FOR EDUCATION, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶48

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

¶49

One CC to M/s. R. SUDHA RANI, Advocate SC FOR SARVA SIKSHYA ABHIYAN [OPUC]

¶50

Three C.D. Copies

MBT

UCH

HIGH COURT

DATED:23/01/2024

ORDER

WP.No.386 of 2024

ICCcnja%
~^hr

o
o e?
/i m
U3r
7 4 MAY 202^
W currani Section

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WP

¶61

WITHOUT COSTS

P Divaker Reddy v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P Divaker Reddy 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

St. Mary's Girls High School, Vs The State of A.P.

Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Patly Aided High School Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

S.B.v.D.Sabha Degree College Vs Govt.of Ap,Prl.Scy,H.E.,Hyd,and 3

Velidi Suresh, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

G.S.R. and T.S.R. Education Society, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Mallela Siva Nageswara Rao Vs the State of Ap