Y Venkat Reddy Vs the State of Ap

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

¶20

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶21

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 topleased 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 withholding the Rs.16,40,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Forty Thousand only) even after finalizing the bills, payable to the Petitioner in relation to the work Completion of KGBV Upgraded Junior College at Roddam (V and M) in Anantapur District vide Agreement No. 21/2020-21, Dtl0-06-2020 with interest @ 24 percentage per annum for the delayed amount till date of realization for the works executed by the petitioner and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

RAGHU BABU KALAMATA SC For Samagra Siksha

¶26

GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

3

¶29

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶30

W.P.No.29924 OF 2025

¶31

O R D E R:

¶32

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in withholding Rs.16,40,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Forty Thousand only), even after finalizing the bills, payable to the Petitioner in relation to completed work ‘KGBV Upgraded Junior College at Roddam (V & M) in Anantapur District vide Agreement No.21/2020-21, dated 10.06.2020’, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶33

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 to 5 passed on signed instructions wherein the amount that was claimed by the Petitioner towards additional work executed by him was disputed on the ground that ‘works are not sanctioned as per records’.

¶34

As a dispute with regard to the amount claimed was raised, the counsel for Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the Writ Petition with a liberty to approach appropriate forum for determination of claim. Considering the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, leaving it open to the Petitioner, to

¶35

4

¶36

pursue remedies as provided under law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed

¶38

__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

¶39

Date: 06.02.2026 chs

¶40

5