2026:APHC:9143 APHC010015922026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3331]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 1386/2026 Between:

1. M RATTAIAH, S/O. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 1-66, VIDYANAGAR, MULAGUNTAPADU (V), SINGARAYAKONDA (M), PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.

2. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.

3. T HE ENGINEER IN CHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, MG ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. 4.

4. T HE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5

5. T HE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, . PR.PIU DIVISION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not releasing the amounts to the petitioner for the execution of works. Vide Agreement No. 10/2023-24, dated 14-02-2024, for the payment due from the executed work (2ND final Bill) is Rs. 23,78,528/-, respectively as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to Law and against the Principles of Natural Justice and against the Norms of the Public Policy and to issue consequential direction directing the respondent authorities to release the amounts payable to the petitioner with an interest at 18PERCENT per annum and to pass s IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to direct the respondent authorities to release an amount of Rs. 23,78,528/- to the petitioner for the execution of work. Vide Agreement No. 10/2023-24, dated 14-02-2024, respectively, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. VENKAT SAILENDRA G Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following:

::ORDER ::

Heard Ms. Akhila, learned counsel representing Sri Venkat Sailendra G., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development &

Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents.

2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing an amount of Rs.23,78,528/-, payable to the petitioner for execution of work i.e. „Reconstruction of the Road from G.N.T. Road (NH5) to Annangi (via), Gundlapalli In Maddipadu Mandal (Widening and Strengthening of NH5 Road to Gundlakamma Reservoir via Gundlakamma Village Road from 0/0 to 3/500 KM”, as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of respondent No.5.

4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned work and the net amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.23,78,528/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record.

5. Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of the aforementioned works and the petitioner‟s entitlement for Rs.23,78,528/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors v.

Chief General Manager & Ors, 2025 SCC online SC 1400, it was held at Para No.8 as under:

“Be that as it may, the High court has not dealt with the merits of the writ petition. Moreover, it