BharatTaxGST

A Lakshmana Rao vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Original PDF →
WP/4187/2026HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01005981202612 March 2026Bench: SUBBA REDDY SATTI4 pages
For Petitioner: ANNAMNEEDI BALAKRISHNAFor Respondent: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV, MALLIKHARJUNA MOORTHY K (SC FOR A.P HOUSING, CORPORATION LIMITED), GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010059812026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4187/2026 Between: 1. A LAKSHMANA RAO, S/O. A. PANDURANGA RAO AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 17/21, EDEPALLI, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 521001. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE A P STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD, 2ND FLOOR SP RIVER VIEW BUILDING, TADEPALLI, AMARAVATI, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 520001 5. THE ENGINEERINCHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. - 520001 Page 2 of 4 6. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. -520001 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 521001 ...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 or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the payments of Rs. 80,00,000/-, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works for 1) Amount of Rs. 40,00,000/-, for the work Land Levelling 1ST stage in YSR Jagananna Housing Colony in Chinakaragraharam Block -III (sector-C) layout in Machilipatnam (Urban) (Layout ID 068101 LA114093) Part-9, 2) Amount of Rs. 40,00,000/-, for the work Land Levelling 1ST stage in YSR Jagananna Housing Colony in Chinakaragraharam Block -III (sector-C) layout in Machilipatnam (Urban) (Layout ID068101 LA114093) Part-10 under Non- OTS Critical Infrastructure Grant, is as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to release Rs. 80,00,000/- PLUS GST forthwith for the above said works executed by the petitioner and 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 respondents to consider for payment of amount of Rs. 80,00,000/- + GST for the works executed by the petitioner for Filling of Low- lying Lands in YSR Jagananna layout colonies of Krishna District i.e., pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ANNAMNEEDI BALAKRISHNA Page 3 of 4 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. MALLIKHARJUNA MOORTHY K (SC FOR A.P HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED) 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

The Court made the following order : Heard Sri Annamneedi Balakrishna, 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 respondents 1, 2 and 4 to 7 and Sri Mallikarjuna Murthy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.3. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.80,00,000/- payable to the petitioner in relation to the works executed by him under Non-OTS Critical Infrastructure Grant, i.e. 1) Land Levelling 1st stage in YSR Jagananna Housing Colony, Chinakaragraharam Block-III (Sector-C) layout in Machilipatnam (Urban) (Layout ID 068101LA114093) Part-9 and 2) Land Levelling 1st stage in YSR Jagananna Housing Colony, Chinakaragraharam Block-III (Sector-C) layout in Machilipatnam (Urban) (Layout ID 068101LA114093) Part-10, as illegal and arbitrary.

3.

Today when the matter is taken up, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer (FAC), PRI Division, Machilipatnam.

4.

A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works for a total value of Rs.54,27,376/- and the net amount payable to the petitioner after QC / statutory recovery of Rs.14,81,108/-, is Rs.39,46,268/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the same.

6.

Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of the aforementioned work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.39,46,268/-. 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 (FAC), PRI Division, Machilipatnam, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs.39,46,268/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Forty Six Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of aforementioned work, within four (04) 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: 13.03.2026 IKN

1 2025 SCC online SC 1400

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.