G Seetharamaiah Vs the State of Ap

THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROADS AND BUILDINGS (R AND B) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

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

¶16

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR R AND B, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT.

¶17

THE CHIEF ENGINEER RAND B DEPARTMENT, MANAGING DIRECTOR, APRDC, 5TH FLOOR, RAND B HEAD OFFICE IN STATE BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R., DISTRICT.

¶18

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, RAND B CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT.

¶19

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, R AND B DIVISION, MYLAVARAM,

¶20

2

¶21

N.T.R. DISTRICT.

¶22

THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER R AND B, RAND B SUBDIVISION, THIRUVURU, N.T.R. DISTRICT.

¶23

THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, NEAR, ANDHRA HOSPITAL, SURYARAOPET VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT.

¶24

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶25

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 declare the inaction on part of the respondents herein not releasing the final bill an gross amount of Rs.19,47,283/- vide Agreement No. 08/2023-24 dated 12.09.2023, D.R.No. 66/2022-23 dt. 28.03.2023 and M.Book.No. 4076A, name of the Work Urgent Repairs to damaged slab culvert (IV of 3.00M span) at Km.9/4 of T.R. Road to Satyalapadu-Gosaveedu Road in N.T.R District, with interest of execution of completion of R and B works under Roads and Buildings Department as per agreement to the petitioner till today and causing heavy loss with interest even though total works were completed as per the agreements as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents releasing the final bill of total amount worth of Rs.19,47,283/- for execution of completion of R and B works under Roads and Transport Department as per agreement to the petitioner forthwith and to pass

¶26

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶27

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 to direct the respondents releasing the Final Bill an gross amount of Rs.19,47,283/- , with interest of execution of completion of works under R&B Department as per agreement to the petitioner forthwith, and to pass

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶29

1.PAMARTHI KAMESWARA RAO

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

1.GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS

¶32

2.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶33

The Court made the following:

¶34

3

¶35

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.29435 OF 2025

¶36

ORDER:

¶37

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶38

India seeking the following relief:

¶39

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the inaction on part of the respondents herein not releasing the final bill an gross amount of Rs.19,47,283/- vide Agreement No. 08/2023-24 dated 12.09.2023, D.R.No. 66/2022-23 dt. 28.03.2023 and M.Book.No. 4076A, name of the Work Urgent Repairs to damaged slab culvert (IV of 3.00M span) at Km.9/4 of T.R. Road to SatyalapaduGosaveedu Road in N.T.R District, with interest of execution of completion of R and B works under Roads and Buildings Department as per agreement to the petitioner till today and causing heavy loss with interest even though total works were completed as per the agreements as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents releasing the final bill of total amount worth of Rs.19,47,283/- for execution of completion of R and B works under Roads and Transport Department as per agreement to the petitioner forthwith and to pass such other order or orders …”

¶40

Heard Sri Pamarthi Kameswara Rao, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondents.

¶41

The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents for not releasing the final bill a Gross amount of Rs.19,47,283/vide Agreement No.08/2023-24 dated 12.09.2023, D.R.No.66/2022-23 dated 28.03.2023 and M Book No.4076A, name of the work “Urgent repairs to damaged slab culvert (1V of 3.00M span) at KM 9/4 of T.R.Road to Satyalapadu-Gosaveedu Road in NTR District, with interest of execution of completion of R & B Works under Roads & Buildings Department as per

¶42

4

¶43

agreement to the petitioner till today and causing heavy loss with interest even though total work was completed as per the agreement as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶44

Learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings placed written instructions dated 23.01.2026 addressed by the Executive Engineer Roads & Buildings, Division, Mylavararam. As seen from the instructions, the respondents have agreed that the petitioner has completed the works in all aspects within the EOT period i.e., by 26.03.2024. Further, the bill was passed of Rs.19,47,291/- vide page No.52 of M Book No.4076A. The bill was

¶45

submitted to the Pay and Accounts Officer,, WA, Vijayawada for Rs.19,47,291/- vide NIDHI Bill No.2025-2319623 on 20.01.2026 and the bill is under scrutiny at Pay and Accounts Officer, Vijayawada.

¶46

Insofar as the interest component, the respondents contended that the petitioner should approach the appropriate forum, relying on the order of the Division Bench in W.A.791 of 2022 dated 26.04.2022. The Division Bench affirmed the Single Judge‟s order, directing the petitioner to seek relief regarding interest from the appropriate forum. In a catena of cases this Court had held that where dispute revolves round questions of fact, the matter ought not be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶47

In the present case, the respondents have not disputed the payment due to the petitioner for the work executed and the respondents have manifested in their written instructions that they will pay the amount to the petitioner and they are unable to the pay due to “Bill waiting for fund

¶48

5

¶49

clearance”, once the work executed by the petitioner to the respondents is admitted and the payment due to the petitioner is not disputed by the respondents, there was hardly no need for this Court to refer the matter to any forum or for arbitration for passing an arbitral award assuming that any condition in the agreement to that extent. Hence, this Court directs the respondents to pay the admitted amount to the petitioner.

¶50

In The D.F.O., South Kheri And Ors. vs Ram Sanehi Singh1, the Hon‟ble Apex Court held that when a State decides not to pay the dues with mala fide, with ulterior motives or arbitrarily or when the State avoids payment of the dues with mala fide, with ulterior motives, arbitrarily or when the State discriminates, while making payment dues, such a decision of the State not to pay or such an act of the State of not paying its dues cannot be said to be wholly beyond the reach of Article 226, for asking the writ Court to do is to force the State to act in accordance with its constitutional obligation by adhering to the letter and spirit of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶51

In view of the above, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with following directions:

¶52

(a) The respondents are directed to clear the due amount to the petitioner within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶53

6

¶54

(b) Sum due to the petitioner would mean, the sum arrived after

¶55

statutory deductions. If there is any dispute regarding statutory recoveries, the petitioner is at liberty to communicate/interface with the respondents.

¶56

(c) With regard to interest, the petitioner is at liberty to approach appropriate forum.

¶57

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶58

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

¶59

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶60

Date: 10.02.2026

¶61

SSA

G Seetharamaiah v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G Seetharamaiah v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.v.Krishna Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Bera Ramaswamy Vs Keerthi Chekuri IAS

S S Builders Vs the State of Ap

P Padda Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Dharma Shasta Contractors Vs the State of Ap

Ptr Brothers Projects Vs the State of Ap