Dismissed

Agadallanka Water Users Association v. The Executive Engineer

Telangana HC12 Feb 2009WP/23903/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking declaration that respondents failed to resolve a payment dispute and were acting illegally. Court disposed of petition by directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks, without deciding the actual entitlement to payment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.07.2002, pass appropriate orders by following due process of law, and communicate the decision within eight weeks

Agadallanka Water Users Association Vs The… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 23903 of 2002

¶6

Between:

¶7

Agadallanka Water Users Association Rep. by its President ; Baleswami Seetha Rama Krishna Rao Agadallanka water Usera Association, Agadallanka Village, Bhimadole Mandal, West Godavari District R/o Agadallanka Bhimadole Mandal, West Godavari District

¶8

..... PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Western Division, Nidadavole, West Godavari District

¶11

2 Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary Irrigation & CAD Department Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

.....RESPONDENTS

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in not resolving the disputes with regard to payment of due amount as per clause 8 of the Articles of Agreement dated 1-9-2001 for releasing he amounts payable to the petitioner association by considering the petitioner's representation dated 2-7-2002 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and for a consequential order directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 2-7-2002 forthwith.

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CH.DHANAMJAYA

¶15

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV.

¶16

The Court made the following :

¶17

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI

¶18

WRIT PETITION NO : 23903 of 2002

¶19

O R D E R:

¶20

This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondents in not resolving the dispute with regard to payment of the amounts due to the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal.

¶21

In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, the fact that the work was executed by the petitioner-association has not been disputed. It is also stated that the administrative sanction was granted vide G.O.Rt.No.354, dated 29.03.2001 for Rs.17.12 lakhs. It is also stated that an agreement was concluded to that effect vide agreement No.7/2001-02. The counter-affidavit also shows that a sum of Rs.16,55,116/- was paid to the petitioner-association based on measurements taken on site during the year 2001. It is claimed by the first respondent that the final bill for the accepted quantity as per measurements recorded in Measurements Book was paid in September, 2001. Therefore, the petitioner-association is not entitled for any further payment.

¶22

On the other hand, the petitioner-association states that it is entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.23,56,046/- apart from the interest payable thereon. It is also stated that as per Clause 8 of the Articles of Agreement, which provides for settlement of disputes, they made a representation to the first respondent for settlement of their claim.

¶23

In the circumstances, it is for the first respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶24

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the representation made by the petitioner, dated 02.07.2002 by following due process of law and communicate the same to the petitioner-association within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the entitlement of the petitioner to receive further amounts and it is open to the first respondent to consider the claim in accordance with law. No costs.

¶25

_____________ G.ROHINI,J 12^th February 2009 KH

Agadallanka Water Users Association v. The Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Agadallanka Water Users Association v. The Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ch.Venkat Rami Reddy, Vs The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd./

The Imlibun Residents Welfare Society, Vs The District Collector

Seelam Srinivasa Chakravarthi, Vs The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation

Sathi Phalakshi Reddy Vs The Andhra Pradersh State Transmission Corporation Ltd.

Andhra Pradesh State Ware Housing Corporation and other Vs State Ware Housing Corporation A.P.

Pendyala Mary Rajeshwari Vs The Suerintendent of Police, W.G.District, Eluru