The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed the writ petition as infructuous because the legal representative submitted that the amount claimed was already paid by the respondents.
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.
‘ "S'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV (Special Origmal Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY. THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 550 OF 2022
Between:
...Petitioner
AND
...Respondents
Petition under Article 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in non-payment of amounts due for the last three years even .after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner after the successful completion of the
execution of different irrigation works in the limits of Chowdaripalem Village of Kavali Mandal of S.P.S.R.Nellore District under Neeru-Chettu programme duly approved by the respondents, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust unreasonable and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to consider the payment of amounts due to the petitioner in respect of execution of said work forthwith.
lA NO: 1 OF 2022
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 pay the amounts payable to the petitioner for different irrigation works in the limits of Chowdaripalem Village of Kavali Mandal of S.P.S.R.Nellore District executed by him under "Neeru-Chettu" programme immediately, pending disposalofthe main writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRi. NIMMAGADDA REVATHi
Counsel for the Respondent 1 : GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING Counsel for the Respondents 2,3, 5. 6 ; GP FOR FINANCE IRRIGATION Counsel for the Respondent 4 : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order :
p-
w fe.'
w i' ¥ 'l\ ;!■ (r P'
\
THE HQN’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAQADDA
WRIT PETITION No.550 of 2022
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amount is already paid by the respondents. Hence, no further orders are required in this Writ Petition.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.No costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
To,
//TRUE COPY//
SDI- K.SR1NIVASA RAJU assistant registrar BK SECTION OFFICER
HIGH COURT
DATED:02/02/2024
.■&
c}%
ar m
CD 2 4 JUL 202A 03
^ , Gurreni Section i.c
ORDER
WP.No.550 of 2022
DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
Parri Maheswari
The State of Andhra Pradesh
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
