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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 2342

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
M/s Maruthi Constructions – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 16624/2024



APHC010324962024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3330]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 16624/2024 Between:

1. M /S MARUTHI CONSTRUCTIONS,, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, B. TRIVIKRAM S/O B.R.K MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC- CONTRACTOR, R/O D.NO. 54-14/1-9/5, BHARATHI NAGAR, 4TH CROSS, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE ENGINEERINCHIEF, (R AND B), MDR, VIJAYAWADA

3. E XECUTIVE ENGINEER, (R AND B) DIVISION, VIJAYAWADA

4. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR 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 a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents herein, in withholding the payment of bill for an amount of Rs.38,53,960/- (CFMS.No.2024-164287) even after finahzing the bill payable to the petitioner in relation to the work Urgent repairs to Vijayawada - Machilipatnam Road from km. 0.000 to 1.680 in NTR District as per the Agreement DR No33/2023-24, Dt. 16.08.2023 is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitraiy and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of the bill of Rs.38,53,960/- with an interest @24percent per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-

mentioned work forthwith and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to DIRECT the respondents to consider for payment of Rs.38,53,960/- (CFMS.No.2024-164287) with an interest of 24% per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of work i.e., “Urgent repairs to Vijayawada - Machilipatnam Road from km. 0.000 to 1.680 in NTR District as per the Agreement DR No:33/2023-24, Dt. 16.08.2023, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant Leave for filing of the Counter Affidavit in WP.No. 16624 of 2024 Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.16624 OF 2024

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 declaring the action of the Respondents herein, in withholding the payment of bill for an amount of Rs.38,53,960/- (CFMS.No.2024-164287) even after finahzing the bill payable to the petitioner in relation to the work Urgent repairs to Vijayawada - Machilipatnam Road from km. 0.000 to 1.680 in NTR District as per the Agreement DR No33/2023-24, Dt. 16.08.2023 is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of the bill of Rs.38,53,960/- with an 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…”

2. Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondents.

3. The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of bi

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 Back to top