Lanka Rama Siva Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
APHC010642182025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3331] THUR AY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 33208/2025 Between:
LANKA RAMA SIVA REDDY, S/O. ESWARA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O.H.NO.26-2-27, RITHWIK ENCLAVE, A.K. NAGAR, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ (PIU), UDAYAGIRI, SPSR NELLORE 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 appropriate writ, direction, order or orders, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus in questioning the action of the respondents in not releasing bill payment for the package of works i.e., Package No.APAM/NLR/UDAYAGIRI/22 consisting of 2 works (1.Urgent
Repairs to the Road from KU Road to Rachavaripalli 0/0 to 6/0 Km in Duttalur Mandal of SPS Nellore District Estimate Cost Rs. 144.00 Lakhs and 2.Urgent Repairs to the Road from KB Road to Vengamamba Temple Bypass Road in Duttalur Mandal of SPS Nellore District Estimate Cost Rs.56.00 Lakhs) in Udayagiri Constituency - Est. Cost Rs.200.00 Lakhs for the estimated contract value of Rs.1,56,10,613/- in respect of the bill amount of Rs.1,59,61,866/- for the works executed by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release an amount of Rs.1,59,61,866/- towards the bill amount for the works executed by the petitioner and to 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 to direct the respondents to release an amount of Rs.1,59,61,866/- towards bill amount for the package of works executed by the petitioner i.e., Package No.APAM/NLR/UDAYAGIRI/22 consisting of 2 works (1.Urgent Repairs to the Road from KU Road to Rachavaripalli 0/0 to 6/0 Km in Duttalur Mandal of SPS Nellore District Estimate Cost Rs.144.00 Lakhs and 2.Urgent Repairs to the Road from KB Road to Vengamamba Temple Bypass Road in Duttalur Mandal of SPS Nellore District Estimate Cost Rs.56.00 Lakhs) in Udayagiri Constituency - Est. Cost Rs.200.00 Lakhs, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
K NAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following:
::ORDER ::
The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.1,59,61,866/- payable to the petitioner in relation to the works executed by the petitioner i.e. Package
No.APAM/NLR/UDAYAGIRI/22 consisting of two works in Udayagiri Constituency, as illegal and arbitrary.
Heard Sri K. Naveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Panuku Rajesh Kumar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, appeared for the respondents.
A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No.
At para No.7, it was stated as follows: “I submit that with regard to Agreement No. 21/2022-23, dated: 01.10.2022 an amount of Rs.1,59,84,371/- (excluding GST) after statutory deductions from the gross amount of Rs.1,98,23,298/- including of QC revoery amount i.e., Rs.22,505/-.”
Learned counsel for the petitioner did not refute the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.3. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions, there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.1,59,84,371/-. 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.”.
1 2025 SCC online SC 1400
Given the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.3, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.1,59,84,371/- payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned works, within six (06) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 23.04.2026 TVN
229 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 33208 of 2025
Date: 23.04.2026 TVN
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.