Sri Garuda Projects Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

SRI GARUDA PRO J ECTS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING P ARTNER A.SIRISH KUMAR S/ O LATE ANANDA REDDY, AGE 48 YE A RS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O VARADARAJULAPALLE VILLAGE, M APAKSHI POST, CHITTOOR M A NDAL AND DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF A NDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY P RINCIPAL SECRETARY, R E VENUE DEPARTMENT, SEC R ETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAG A PUDI, AMARAVATHI.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT C H ITTOOR.

¶15

THE REVENUE DI V ISIONAL OFFICER, CHITTOOR R EVENUE DIVISION AT CHITT O OR.

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR, C H ITTOOR MANDAL AT CHITTOOR, C HITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶17

THE CHITTOOR M UNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, C H ITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶18

THE ANDHRA PRAD E SH STATE HOUSING CORPORATIO N , REP BY ITS MANAGING DI R ECTOR, OFFICE AT PLOT NO.11 AND 12, BEHIND BSNL T E LEPHONE EXCHANGE , AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE

¶19

2

¶20

COURT ORDER DT 26.04.2024 VIDE ORDERS PASSED IN I.A.NO.02 OF 2024

¶21

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶22

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 an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in non-payment of total an amount of Rs.25,22,250/- for engaging the JCB vehicles for 1098 hours i.e., 247 plus 195 plus 238 plus 191 plus 227 -1098 hours and Hitachi total for 657 hours i.e., 140 plus 113 plus 140 plus 133 plus 131- 657 hours, for doing five (5) works by engaging the machineries of Hitachi, JCB and other equipments, for the purpose of removal of boulders, cutting of Hill rock area and levelling of land for construction of new house plots for distribution of house sites to the eligible beneficiaries under the scheme of Navarathnalu - Pedalandariki lllu in YSR Jagananna layout, Anupalli Village Chittoor Mandal and District, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice, and consequently direct the respondents to pay an amount of Rs.25,22,250/- due under Annexure-C dated 16-03-2023, 2003- 2023, 02-04-2023, 25,04-2023 and 16-04-2023, and pass

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶24

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 release the funds through a proper channel for payment of Rs.25,22,250/- due under Annexure-C dated 16-03-2023, 20-032023, 02-04-2023, 25,04-2023 & 16-04-2023, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

¶25

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶26

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 permit the petitioner to implead the proposed respondent herein as 6th respondent in WP.No.5595 of 2024 as well as in IA.No.1 of 2024, and pass

¶27

IA NO: 3 OF 2024

¶28

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 Pleased to grant leave to the Respondent No.5 in the Writ Petition No.5595 of 2024 to file a Counter Affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass

¶29

3

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶31

1.K V L NARASIMHA RAO

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶33

1.POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In

¶34

2.K MALLIKHARJUNA MOORTHY

¶35

3.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶36

The Court made the following:

¶37

4

¶38

Order:-

¶39

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was awarded five works, for which machineries were engaged, namely, Hitachi for 657 hours, JCB for 1,098 hours, and other equipment, for the purpose of removing boulders, cutting hill rock areas, and leveling the land for the construction of new house plots to be distributed to eligible beneficiaries under the scheme of Navarathnalu – Pedalandariki Illu in YSR Jagananna Layout, Anupalli Village, Chittoor Mandal and District.

¶40

The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner duly executed the works and thereafter submitted the final bills for an amount of Rs.25,22,250/-. It is submitted that the said final bills were duly endorsed by the competent authority. However, in spite of the completion of all procedural formalities, the payment towards the completed works has not been released till date.

¶41

Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, and the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation.

¶42

It is stated in the counter filed by the 5^th respondent that the bills could not be paid on account of financial constraints. It is further stated that the petitioner will be paid soon after the release of the budget to the 5^th respondent Corporation. It is also submitted that the bills due and payable to the petitioner are admitted. During the course of hearing, the learned

¶43

5

¶44

Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation does not dispute the submissions made by the petitioner with respect to the completion of the works undertaken.

¶45

Considering the submissions, there shall be a direction to the respondents to verify and release the payments as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶46

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶47

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶48

____________________

¶49

JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶50

05.11.2025 PNS

Sri Garuda Projects v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Garuda Projects v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karri Venkata Reddy Vs the State of Ap

Vinod Kumar Perugu Vs the State of Ap

Mukka Venkataramana Vs the State of Ap

Sri Rama Seva Samajam(Yadava) Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Mohammed Liyakath Ali Vs the State of Ap

Venkata Siva Padhiva Vs the State of Ap