SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(AP) 28

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V.SUJATHA, J.
Keller Ground Engineering India Private Limited, Represented By Its Authorized Representative, Mr. M. Ganesh Kumar – Petitioner 
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented By Its Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 28711 of 2023
Decided On : 08-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sai Sanjay Suraneni.
For the Respondents: GP For Finance Planning, GP For Irrigation Comm Area Dev.

The court ruled that a subcontractor is entitled to payment for completed works despite the termination of the main contract, emphasizing the obligations of the contracting authority to honor such payments under Articles 14 and 19.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14 and 19 - Writ of Mandamus - Withholding of payment for completed works under Polavaram Irrigation Project claimed to be arbitrary and unlawful - Petitioner seeks payment of Rs.52,41,49,107/- with interest for jet grouting and compaction works - The agreement with the main contractor was terminated, but the State sanctioned amounts for subcontractors directly, emphasizing the obligation to pay for completed work. (Paras 1, 9, 18, 26)

(B) Contractual Obligations - The petitioner, as a subcontractor, maintains that the Water Resources Department's direct instructions and the acknowledgment of completed work impose liability for payment despite no formal contract existing post-termination. (Paras 26, 27)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner executed several ground improvement works at Polavaram Irrigation Project under subcontracts with a main contractor who faced insolvency. Payment for completed work was significantly behind, with amounts withheld, leading to this writ petition for owed dues. (Paras 4-6, 13)

Findings of Court:
The Water Resources Department is mandated to pay Rs.45,90,00,000/- to the petitioner, recognizing their role in the project and the completed works despite the alleged absence of a direct contractual relationship after the main contract termination. (Paras 26, 28)

Issues: Whether the withholding of payment is arbitrary, and the existence of a contractual obligation for payment despite the termination of the main contract. (Paras 3, 26)

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the Water Resources Department cannot evade its duty to pay for services rendered, recognizing that a strong nexus existed between the petitioner and the department through direct supervision and instructions. (Paras 26, 28)

Result: Petitioner entitled to receive payment of Rs.45,90,00,000/- within eight months.

Table of Content
1. background on polavaram irrigation project and subcontractor activities. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. dispute over payments and contractual obligations. (Para 7 , 8 , 10)
3. arguments presented by both parties regarding payment liabilities. (Para 12 , 16)
4. court's analysis on the validity of claims and obligations post-termination of agreement. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
5. clarification on continuing payment obligations despite contract termination. (Para 24 , 26)
6. conclusion directing payment to the petitioner. (Para 28)

ORDER :

V. SUJATHA, J.

This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“….to issue a writ, direction, or order more so in the nature of a writ of mandamus- (a)declaring that the action of Respondent 1, the Water Resources Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh (WRD) and Respondent 2, the Chief Engineer, WRD, of withholding the amount due and payable to the Petitioner towards the jet grouting, ECPT and vibro compaction works completed at the Polavaram Irrigation Project is manifestly arbitrary, unlawful and violates the Petitioner's rights under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, 1950, and consequently (b) direct the State of Andhra Pradesh to remit amounts to the tune of INR 52,41,49,107/- (Rupees Fifty-Two Crores Forty-One Lakh Forty-Nine Thousand One Hundred and Seven only) (including GST) which are due and payable to the Petitioner along with interest….”

2. The petitioner herein is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of ground improvement, which is a critical part of all construction projects. It is a well known fact that Polavaram Irrigation Project is a multi-purpose public works project that provides irrigation to the highland areas of Visakhapatnam, East Godavari, West Godavari and Krishna districts. Polvaram Irrigation Project was declared as a national project under Section 90 of the Andhra Pradesh State Reorganization Act, 2014 and subsequently, the Polavaram Project Authority was constituted by the Central Government vide gazette notification dated 28.05.2014. Vide office memorandum F.No.1(2)/PF-1/2014, dated 30.09.2016, the Government of India decided that the State of Andhra Pradesh would execute all irrigation related construction works of the Polavaram Irrigation Project on its behalf. The 1st respondent is the responsible authority for the construction and development of irrigation projects in the State of Andhra Pradesh such as the Polavaram Irrigation Project and the 2nd respondent herein is the Chief Engineer for the Polavaram Irrigation Project.

3. On 02.03.2013, the 2nd respondent entered into an Engineer, Procurement and Construction agreement with the 4th respondent – Transstroy JSC EC UES (JV), for carrying out construction works at the Polavaram Irrigation Project which includes, surveying, investigation, sub-soil exploration, designs, engineering, estimates and construction of the Earth dams for Gap-I & Gap-III, Earth-cum-rock fill dam for Gap-II, spill channel and excavation of foundations for a 960 MW hydroelectric power house including approach channel, intake structure etc. A supplementary agreement was also executed between the respondent authorities and the 4th respondent on 07.10.2016. In a meeting held on 08.06.2017 and 09.06.2017, the Dam Designs Review Panel decided to carryout geotechnical investigations that are necessary for the design of the Earth-cum-Rock Fill dam and to use jet grouting for the cut-offs at the upstream and downstream coffer dams.

4. Subsequently, the 4th respondent sub-contracted part of the scope of work to the petitioner herein through the following work orders:

i. Work Order dated 03.06.2017 for Electronic Cone Penetration Tests for an Earth-cum-Rock Fill dam base and along the axis of upstream and downstream cofferdams for the Polavaram Irrigation Project.

ii. Work Order dated 11.07.2017 for

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top