Kummari Pullaiah Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE DIRECTOR OF WORKS AND ACCOUNT OFFICER, ANJANEYA TOWERS, IBRAHIMPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶15

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT.

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, OFFICE AT SRI KRISHNA ENCLAVE, GORANTLA, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶17

THE KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

¶18

Page 2 of 6

¶19

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PRI CIRCLE, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT.

¶20

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DIVISION, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT.

¶21

THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ SUB DIVISION, NANDYAL, NANDYAL 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, Order, or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the total final bills amount worth of Rs. 14,77,661/-, 1) Rs, 4,95,903/- vide its Proceedings. Roc. No. 114/GGMP/Gadivemula-11/DySO(1)/20 22. Dated 27.12.2023 vide M.Book.No.0409-B for the work of Providing CC Road with Drain from Gokari house to Burial ground and other Roads Culverts at Karimaddela village of Gadivemula mandal, 2) Rs. 4,87,745/- vide its Proceedings. Roc. No. 114/GGMP/Gadivemula-11/DySO(1)/2022, Dated 27.12.2023 vide M.Book.No.0409-B for the work of Providing CC Road with Drain from Boya Shivanna house to Ramireddy Venkateswara reddy house and other Roads and Culverts at Karimaddela village fo Gadivemula Mandal, 3) Rs. 4,94,013/vide its Proceedings. Roc. No. 114/GGMP/Gadivemula- 11/DySO(1)/2022, Dated 27.12.2023 vide M.Book.No.0409-B for the work of Providing CC Road with Drain from Boya Shivanna house to Ramireddy Venkateswara reddy house and a other Roads and Culverts at Karimaddela village fo Gadivemula Mandal the and above said work was sanction under Gadapa Gadapaku Mana Prabhutvam (GGMP) under Panchayat Raj Engineering Department as per agreements to the petitioner ,as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to release the pending bills total amount of Rs. 14,77,661/- with interest at 18 percent for the pending bills forthwith for the above said works executed by the petitioner and pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶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 respondents to consider for pending bills of Rs. 14,77,661/-, 1) Rs. 4,95,903/- vide its Proceedings. Roc. No. 114/GGMP/Gadivemula-

¶26

Page 3 of 6

¶27

11/DySO(1)/2022, Dated 27.12.2023 vide M.Book.No.0409-B 2) Rs. 4,87,745/- vide its Proceedings. Roc. No. 114/GGMP/Gadivemula11/DySO(1)/2022, Dated 27.12.2023 vide M.Book.No.0409-B, 3) Rs. 4,94,013/- vide its Proceedings. Roc. No. 114/GGMP/Gadivemula11/DySO(1)/2022, Dated 27.12.2023 vide M.Book.No.0409-B, the and above said work was sanction under Gadapa Gadapaku Mana Prabhutvam (GGMP) under Panchayat Raj Engineering Department as per agreements to the petitioner under Municipal Administration Department through the Agreements forthwith, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶29

1.ANNAMNEEDI BALAKRISHNA

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

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

¶32

2.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

¶33

3.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶34

The Court made the following order:

¶35

Heard, Sri Annamneddi Balakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents.

¶36

The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.14,77,661/- (Rs.4,95,903/- + Rs.4,87,745/- + Rs.4,94,013/-) payable to the petitioner in relation to the works executed i.e., 1) Providing CC Road with Drain from Gokari House to Burial ground and other Roads Culverts at Karimaddela Village of Gadivemula Mandal, 2) Providing CC Road with Drain from Boya Shivanna house to Ramireddy Venkateswara Reddy house and other Roads and Culverts at Karimaddela Village of Gadivemula Mandal and 3) Providing CC Road with Drain from Kiranayya house to Segireddy Nagireddy house and a other road at Karimaddela Village of Gadivemula Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶37

Page 4 of 6

¶38

Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer, P.R.Division, Nandyal – 8^th respondent.

¶39

A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works for a total value of Rs.14,77,661/(Rs.4,95,903/- + Rs.4,87,745 /- + Rs.4,94,013 /-) and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions of Rs.1,63,888/- (Rs.55,482/- + Rs.54,340/- + Rs.54,066/-), is Rs.13,73,773/- (Rs.4,40,421/- + Rs.4,33,405/- + Rs.4,39,947/-). The written instructions are made as part of the record.

¶40

Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the same.

¶41

The petitioner has paid a Court Fee of only Rs.100/-, and the petitioner shall pay the deficit Court Fee of Rs.200/- within one week from the receipt of the order copy and file a memo to that effect, failing which the Registry will take necessary steps for payment of the deficit Court Fee.

¶42

Thus, as seen from the instructions, there is no dispute regarding the execution of the aforementioned works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.13,13,773/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors v. Chief General Manager & Ors¹ , it was held at Para No.8 as under:

¶43

“Be that as it may, the High court has not dealt with the merits of the writ petition. Moreover, it is not an inviolable rule that no money claim can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Non-payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the part of respondents and for claiming the same, a writ petition may lie. Further, throwing a writ petition on ground of availability of alternative remedy after 10 years, particularly, when parties have exchanged their affidavits, is not the correct course unless there are disputed questions of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.”

¶44

1 2025 SCC online SC 1400

¶45

Page 5 of 6

¶46

Given the instructions furnished by the Executive Engineer, P.R.Division, Nandyal – 8^th respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs.13,13,773/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Thirteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy Three only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of aforementioned works, within three (03) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs.

¶47

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

¶48

___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

Date: 01.04.2026 SNI

Page 6 of 6

236

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI