Lakshmi Constructions Vs the State of Ap

LAKSHMI CONSTRUCTIONS, (FIRM NO. 13 OF 2009 REGISTER OF FIRMS, GUNTUR) REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI KONDA LAKSHMI NAGA RAMESH, S/O LAKSHMI NARYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 26-5-6, AMMISETTYVARI STREET, NAGARAMPALEM, GUNTUR GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING A.P SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (AP) FINANCE DEPARTMENT. ROOM NO. 286, 1ST FLOOR, BUILDING NO. 2, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI - 522 238

¶15

THE DIRECTORATE OF WORKS AND ACCOUNTS, REP BY ITS DIRECTOR OF WORKS AND ACCOUNTS 3RD FLOOR, C BLOCK, ANJANEYA TOWERS, IBRAHIMPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR, OF MUNICIPAL

¶17

Page 2 of 6

¶18

ADMINISTRATION, ANDHRA PRADESH AT PRIME HILL CREST, VADDESWARAM, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶19

THE ANDHRA PRADESH COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CFMS, CEO, NIDHI BHAVAN, APIIC PARK, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶20

THE MANGALAGIRI TADEPALLI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶21

THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, MANGALAGIRI -TADEPALLI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

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 or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the Contract Amount and respondents is not willing to prepare final bill amount to petitioner herein in relation to contract Work i.e MTMC-New Formation and widening of CC Road From R and B Road Delight Data to Sri Krishna Ananda Ashramam in Yerrabalem Village Mangalagiri Tadepalli Municipal Corporation Under Special Grant Funds executed by the petitioner herein, under Agreement Bearing No 817/2022-2023 Dt. 18-03-2023 despite lapse of more than one years, even after finalizing the bills, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents herein to immediately pay the amount to petitioner herein in relation to contract Work i.e MTMC-New Formation and widening of CC Road From R and B Road Delight Data to Sri Krishna Ananda Ashramam in Yerrabalem Village Mangalagiri Tadepalli Municipal Corporation Under Special Grant Funds Respondent by the petitioner herein, under agreement and supplementary Agreement Bearing No 817/2022-2023 Dt. 18-03-2023and to pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶25

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 herein to release the admitted due amount to petitioner herein in relation to contract Work i.e “MTMC-New Formation and widening of CC Road From R & B Road Delight Data to Sri Krishna Ananda Ashramam in Yerrabalem Village Mangalagiri Tadepalli Municipal Corporation Under Special Grant Funds executed by the petitioner herein, under

¶26

Page 3 of 6

¶27

agreement & supplementary Agreement Bearing No.817/2022-2023 Dt. 1803-2023, within a stipulated time frame and to pass such

¶28

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶29

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 may be pleased to receive the Counter copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the above Writ Petition and pass

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶31

1.KODE RAMESH BABU

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶33

1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

¶34

2.A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP)

¶35

3.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP)

¶36

Page 4 of 6

¶37

The Court made the following Order:

¶38

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning and learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation.

¶39

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the writ petition is filed by the contractor, who executed various works within the limits of the Mangalagiri-Tadepalli Municipal Corporation. The petitioner has completed the works to the satisfaction of the Mangalagiri-Tadepalli Municipal Corporation and the final bills were also approved by the competent authority. However, the bills were not released. The petitioner executed the works during the year 2022–23. It is submitted that the competent authority has approved the bills; however, there has been no payment forthcoming from the Corporation. Aggrieved by the non-payment of the bills by the Corporation, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the above writ petition.

¶40

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for Corporation submits that on 09.08.2024, the Vigilance Enquiry was initiated against the works executed by the petitioner and the Vigilance Enquiry is being conducted on the works which are entrusted to the petitioner. It is also submitted in the counter that the Vigilance Department is taking up verification of the works executed by the petitioner for the year 2019-2024 and the reports were awaited.

¶41

Page 5 of 6

¶42

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the considered view that the bills due payable to the petitioner for the works executed by him would have to be paid without any further delay. There is no time frame for completion of the vigilance enquiry. That apart the learned Standing Counsel has not submitted on the methodology adopted by the vigilance committee to verify the works completed about five years ago. In so far as the Vigilance Enquiry is concerned, in the event an adverse report against the works completed by the petitioner is arrived at, the respondents shall have the right to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. Further, the petitioner shall submit a security bond for the amount released and in case it is found that they are due payable, the department can take appropriate action for recovery of the amount. It is needless to mention that the said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶43