BharatTaxGST

Peethala Sesha Rao vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Original PDF →
WP/5727/2026HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01010031202621 July 2026Bench: SUBBA REDDY SATTI6 pages
For Petitioner: TENEPALLI NIRANJANFor Respondent: GP FOR IRRI AND CAD, GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Date of reserved for orders : ----- Date of pronouncement : 22.07.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010100312026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5727/2026 Between: 1. PEETHALA SESHA RAO, S/O. SAMBAYYA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O. D.NO. 11-44, BATTULA VARI SAVARAM, CHELLURU, RAYAVARAM MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT- 533261. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT IRRIGATION AND CAD WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522237. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522237. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IRRIGATION WING, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533001. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IRRIGATION WING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT, AT AMALAPURAM - 533201. 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, IRRIGATION CIRCLE, Page 2 of 6 DOWLESWARAM, GODAVARI EASTERN DIVISION, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT - 533125. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GODAVARI EASTERN DIVISION, RAMACHANDRAPURAM, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT - 533255. ...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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the inaction on part of the respondents herein not releasing the final bills Total amount worth of Rs. 20,84,805/- along with 18percent GST 1) Rs. 3,96,014/- vide Quality Control Certificate No.59110, dated 09.02.2026, M. Book No. 1857GE and its Agreement No.15D/2024-25, dated 20.07.2024, 2) Rs. 3,86,616/- videQuality Control Certificate No. 59111, dated 09.02.2026, M. Book No. 1861GE and its Agreement No. 14D/2024-25, dated 20.07.2024 , 3) Rs. 3,86,041/- videQuality Control Certificate No. 59112, dated 09.02.2026, M. Book No. 1862GE and its Agreement No.13D/2024-25, dated 20.07.2024, 4) Rs. 3,38,434/-vide Quality Control Certificate No. 58850, dated 09.02.2026, M. Book N0.1858GE and its Agreement No.12D/2024-25, dated 20.07.2024, 5) Rs. 3,27,165/-vide Quality Control Certificate No. 59201, dated 09.02.2026, M. Book N0.1863GE and its Agreement No.10D/2024-25, dated 20.07.2024 6) Rs. 3,13,506/-vide Quality Control Certificate No. 59203, dated 09.02.2026, M. Book N0.1863GE and its Agreement No. 11 D/2024-25, dated 20.07.2024 under Water Resources Department as per agreements to the petitioner till today and causing heavy loss with interest even though total work were completed as per the agreements as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of The Constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents releasing the final bills of total amount worth of Rs. 20,84,805/- along with 18 percent GST for execution of completion of Water Resources works under Irrigation Department as per agreement to the petitioner forthwith and to pass 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 respondents releasing the Final Bill amount of Rs. Page 3 of 6 20,84,805/- along with 18% GST, under Water Resources Department as per agreement to the petitioner forthwith, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TENEPALLI NIRANJAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

The Court made the following order: Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel representing Sri T.Niranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kata Sambasiva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and Command Area Development, appearing for the respondents.

2.

The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing an amount of Rs.20,84,805/- payable to the petitioner in relation to the works executed vide i) Agreement No.15D/2024-25 dated 20.07.2024, ii) Agreement No.14D/2024-25 dated 20.07.2024, iii) Agreement No.13D,2024-25 dated 20.07.2024, iv) Agreement No.12D/2024-25 dated 20.07.2024, v) Agreement No.10D/2024-25 dated 20.07.2024, vi) Agreement No.11D/2024-25 dated 20.07.2024, as illegal and arbitrary.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has executed the works and the appropriate authority issued Quality Control Certificate; however, the respondent authorities have failed to release the amount payable.

4.

Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, Irrigation and Command Area Development, submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer, Godavari Eastern Division, Ramachandrapuram– 6th

respondent vide Letter No.EE/GE.Divn./RCPM/CB/IC2/516 M dated 29.06.2026. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that there is no dispute regarding the execution of the work by the petitioner and the petitioner’s entitlement. The gross amounts payable are Rs.3,96,014/-; Rs.3,86,616/-; Rs.3,86,041/-; Rs.3,38,434/-; Rs.3,27,165/- and Rs.3,13,506/-. After statutory deductions, the petitioner is entitled to Rs. 21,47,776/-.

6.

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 & Ors1, 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 is not an inviolable rule that no money claim can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ juri iction. Non-payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the part of respondents and for claiming the same, a writ petition may lie. Further, throwing a writ petition on ground of availability of alternative remedy after 10 years, particularly, when parties have exchanged their affidavits, is not the correct course unless there are disputed questions of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.”

7.

Given the instructions furnished by the Executive Engineer, Godavari Eastern Division, Ramachandrapuram – 6th respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs.21,47,776/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy Six only) along with GST payable to the petitioner regarding execution of aforementioned works, within three (03) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs.

1 2025 SCC online SC 1400

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 22.07.2026 JLV

Whether the order is:

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 194 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

WRIT PETITION NO: 5727 of 2026

Date: 22.07.2026 JLV

Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.