Contractor sought mandamus for payment of withheld amounts under a KC Canal works agreement. Respondents paid the principal during pendency; contempt proceedings were closed. The court dismissed the petition as infructuous, leaving interest claims to fresh proceedings.
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)
FRIDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY" I TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR '
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 8411 OF 2022
Between:
Ayacut Dar Committee, Pamulapadu, Kurnool District Represented by its President, B. Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Busi Reddy, aged S3years' R/o. H. No. 1-68, Bhanumukkala Village, Pamulapadu Mandal, Kurnool District. ...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the Su™ writ'of m'Tnrt'’ High Court may be pleased to n thl nT^ Of rnandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction more particularly one the oavment o^^ Mandamus declaring the action of therespondentsinwithholding Itrlnnm Petitioner in relation to the repairs and Ayacut road from K. Prasad fields to Shankar Reddy fields near oetmonlr village of KC Canal, under the jurisdiction of petitioner herein vide Agreement No. 1645/2018-19 dated 05 10 2018 as illeoal executionrespondentsof aforeto paymentionedan amountworksof forthwithRs. 8,02,477/- due to the petitioneruuner min respectrespect ofor
lA NO: 1 OF 2022
':iroumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to take steps for paying the amount of Rs. 8,02,477/- due to the petitioner in
respect of the work executed by him under Neeru Chettu Programme, pending disposal of the Writ Petition
./
Counsel for the Petitioner{s):SRI. GINJUPALLI SUBBA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1, 3 to 6 : GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV
Counsel for the Respondent No.2; GP FOR FINANCE
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITON Nq.8411 of 2022
ORDER;
- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
- When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Finance and Planning, on oral instructionssubmitted that respondent authorities paid the total due amount' claimed by the petitioner.
- On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitionersubmits that the respondents paid the principal amount, but not paid the interest as claimed by the petitioner and the contempt proceedings initiated in C.C.No.2292 of 2022 were also closed.
- In view of the submissions made by the learned counselforthe petitioner and learned Government Pleader that the principal amount was already paid as claimed by the petitioner, contempt proceedings were closed and also the contention ofthe learned Government Pleader that the further claim of interest for delayed
payment can be agitated by way of initiation of separate/fresh legal proceedings is also valid and sustainable.
- In view of the facts and circumstances and for the reasons stated above, the present Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous, grantmg liberty to the petitioner to claim differential amount/withheld amount or interest amount, if any, by way of initiation of fresh/separate legal proceedings in accordance with law.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall
stand closed.
Sd/.VDIWAKAR deputyri //true copy// egistrar SECfim OFFICER High Court of Pradesh^Urf P'NANCE AND PUNNING - High Court of Andhra 4- Three CD Copies
To.
HIGH COURT
DATED:16/02/2024
ORDER
WP.No.8411 of 2022
i^ro 1 8 Or.T 202^ m i
to/j
Curren'i Sactiori
PATC
-.^v
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survived when the respondents had paid the principal amount claimed for work done under the Neeru Chettu Programme.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ayacut Dar Committee, Pamulapadu, Kurnool District, represented by its President B. Venkateswara Rao
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Irrigation Department
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Finance Department
The Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation and CAD Department, Vijayawada
Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle
The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, KC Canal Division, Nandyal
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
