Thirumala Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Heard Sri P.Sravan Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondents.

The short grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the petitioner executed the work under C.R.Agreement No.13/2020-21, dated 03.09.2020, i.e., strengthening of Primary Health Centre at Garladinna, Tarimela, Thimmampalli and Putluru in Anantapuramu District. Despite execution of work, the respondents have not released the due amount to the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

Learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings filed counter- affidavit and does not dispute the claim made by the petitioner, except stating that for the total work done by the petitioner, the gross amount is 4

The bills were uploaded in Nidhi portal vide CFMS bill ID:2025-1939137 and the same are pending at RBI level as „Bill waiting for fund clearance‟.

Insofar as the interest component, the respondents contended that the petitioner should approach the appropriate forum, relying on the order of the Division Bench in W.A.791 of 2022 dated 26.04.2022. The Division Bench affirmed the Single Judge‟s order, directing the petitioner to seek relief regarding interest from the appropriate forum. In a catena of cases this Court had held that where dispute revolves round questions of fact, the matter ought not be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In the present case, the respondents have not disputed the payment due to the petitioner for the work executed and the respondents have manifested in their written instructions that they will pay the amount to the petitioner and they are unable to the pay due to “Bill waiting for fund clearance”, once the work executed by the petitioner to the respondents is Hon‟ble Apex Court held that when a State decides not to pay the dues with mala fide, with ulterior motives or arbitrarily or when the State avoids payment of the dues with mala fide, with ulterior motives, arbitrarily or when the State discriminates, while making payment dues, such a decision of the State not to pay or such an act of the State of not paying its dues cannot be said to be wholly beyond the reach of Article 226, for asking the writ Court to do is to force the State to act in accordance with its constitutional obligation by adhering to the letter and spirit of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

In view of the above, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with following directions: (a) The respondents are directed to clear the due amount to the petitioner within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (b) Sum due to the petitioner would mean, the sum arrived after statutory deductions. If there is any dispute regarding statutory recoveries, the petitioner is at liberty to communicate/interface with the respondents.