TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

WRIT PETITION NO: 19954/2024

Between:

M Damodar Reddy ...PETITIONER

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. BATHALA RAMESH

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD

2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents not releasing the payment of balance amount of Rs.7,73,452/- vide M-Book No.6800 ACA even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., Providing CC walls in place of existing damaged lining portion & culvert on Chinthakommadinne branch channel at CSI church near Chinthakommadinne (V) Allagadda (M) in Nandyal District vide Agreement No.120/2023-24 dated 09.06.2023 is questioned as the same is illegal arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents consider for payment of amounts of Rs.7,73,452/- vide M-Book No.6800 ACA with interest @ 24 PERCENT per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of

execution of above mentioned work forthwith and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. In spite of adjourning the matter several times, the respondents have not filed their counter affidavit.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has participated in the tender process and the 4^th respondent has entered into an agreement with the petitioner vide agreement No.120/2023-24, dated 09.06.2023, for execution of works relating to Providing CC walls in place of existing damaged lining portion & culvert on Chinthakommadinne branch channel at CSI church near Chinthakommadinnne Village, Allagadda Mandal, Nandyal District. The petitioner has completed the work. The 5^th respondent has issued quality control certificate and measurement books and passed final bill for an amount of Rs.7,73,452/-.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has borrowed amounts from third parties to execute the work and is paying huge interest. Though the first and final bills were passed in the year 2023, the bills amount is not yet paid to the petitioner even after lapse of two years. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar circumstances, this Court in S. Srinivas Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, 2021 Lawsuit (AP)390 held as under:

“21) In the considered opinion of this Court, withholding the amount for which the petitioner is legitimately entitled is nothing but depriving the petitioner. Due to illegal action of non-payment of the amounts promptly by clearing the bills submitted by the petitioner after execution of works, the petitioner could not feed and see the welfare of his family properly and he could not make payments to his employees/workers and he could not make payments to the material suppliers and he has to pay interests for the debts incurred by him for execution of works. Due to this situation, petitioner’s respect and dignity in the society will be deteriorated.

22) As such this Court holds that withholding the amount, for which the petitioner is legally entitled, is illegal, arbitrary, and unjust and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

24) A larger bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Orissa and others V.

G.C.Roy opinied as extracted hereunder:

“A person deprived of the use of money to which he is legitimately entitled has right to be compensated for the deprivation, call it by any name. It may be called interest, compensation or damages”.

25) The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in J.Devendra Reddy V Kakatiya University and another held that withholding of the amount payable to the petitioner for the contract wor