Disposed

Shaik Samdani Basha v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Sept 2026WP/25751/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a contractor, executed public works for the respondent authorities and was paid except for quality control and social audit amounts recorded in measurement books in 2022. The respondents admitted the debt of Rs.6,11,180/- in written instructions. The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to release the admitted amount with interest as per entitlement within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to release admitted amount of Rs.6,11,180/- with interest as per entitlement within two months.

Shaik Samdani Basha Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010460432026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3311]

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

Thursday, the seventee n th day of September, two thousand and tw e nty six

¶5

Present

¶6

The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi

¶7

Writ Petition No.25751 2026

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri Shaik Samdani Ba s ha,S/o Shaik Ahmad Basha, Occ: C o ntractor, Age: 65 years, R/o. Si n garayakonda Post, Prakasam district, Andhra Pradesh.

¶10

… P etitioner

¶11

and

¶12

The State of An d hra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal S e cretary, Panchayat Raj D e partment, Velagapudi, Guntur district.

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Sec r etary to Government, De p artment of Finance & Planning, Se c retariat, Velagapudi, Gunt u r district.

¶14

The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Deve l opment, Tadepalli, Guntur district.

¶15

The District Colle c tor, Prakasam district.

¶16

The Project Direc t or, DWMA, Ongole, Prakasam district.

¶17

The Executive Engineer, P.R.I. Division, Kandukur, P r akasam district.

¶18

The Singarayakonda Gram Panchayat, rep. by its S e cretary, Singarayakonda ( v ), Prakasam district.

¶19

…Res p ondents

¶20

¶21

BSB, J W. P. No. 25751 of 2026

¶22

Counsel for the petitioner:

¶23

1.Venkat Sailendra. G

¶24

Counsel for the respondents:

¶25

1.G.P. for Panchayat Raj & Rural Dev.

¶26

2.Sasanka Bhuvanagiri (S.C. for Non Services Z.P.P.S. M.P.Ps

¶27

G.P. for Rayalaseema, S.P.S.R. Nellore, Prakasam)

¶28

3.G. P. for Finance & Planning

¶29

The Court made the following:

¶30

¶31

BSB, J

¶32

W. P. No. 25751 of 2026

¶33

ORDER :

¶34

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking the following relief:-

¶35

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not releasing an amount of Rs.6,11,180/- to the petitioner for the execution of above-mentioned works respectively as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to law and against the principles of natural justice and against the norms of the public policy and to issue consequential direction directing the respondent authorities to release the amounts payable to the petitioner with interest @ 6% per annum and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice.”

¶36

The case of the petitioner, briefly stated, is as follows:-

¶37

The respondent authorities entrusted public works to the petitioner and the petitioner had executed the works and the respondent authorities paid the bills by issuing cheques except the quality control (QC) and Social Audit (SA) amounts which were already recorded in measurement books in the year 2022. The respondents failed to release the payments (QC & SA) that are due to the petitioner till today. Hence, the present writ petition was filed.

¶38

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development placed on record a copy of the written

¶39

¶40

BSB, J W. P. No. 25751 of 2026

¶41

instructions of respondent No.6 vide Rc. No. A2 / Court Cases / 2026, dated 15.09.2026, wherein it was mainly stated as follows:-

¶42

“It is submitted that the above works are in completed stage in NIC portal. To be paid amount to the petitioner Rs.6,11,180/- and there is no dispute in amount claimed by the petitioner.”

¶43

The learned counsels for both the parties requested to dispose of the writ petition in the light of the written instructions.

¶44

Having regard to the above submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the admitted amount of Rs.6,11,180/- (Six Lakh Eleven Thousand One Hundred and eighty only) to the petitioner, along with interest as per the entitlement, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶45

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶46

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶47

__________ ___ B.S. BHANUMATHI, J

¶48

Dt. 17.09.2026

¶49

Whether the order is :

¶50

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

¶51

RAR

Shaik Samdani Basha v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Samdani Basha v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

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