M/S Deepthi Ads vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the respondents had not disputed the execution of the works by the petitioner nor denied the entitlement of the petitioner to the amounts payable. The explanation provided by the respondents regarding the closure of bills due to year-end activities was not a valid reason to withhold admitted payments. The Court found the non-payment to be in violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, the Court was inclined to dispose of the writ petitions by directing the respondents to pay the admitted amounts to the petitioner. The operative direction was for the respondents to pay the admitted amounts within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Deepthi Ads, filed seven writ petitions challenging the non-release of payments for advertising campaigns executed through pillar boards, as per work orders issued by respondents 2 and 3 (State authorities). The amounts in dispute range from Rs. 82,48,200/- to Rs. 94,40,000/- per work order. The petitioner claims to have executed the works within the stipulated time, submitted bills including GST, and that the 3rd respondent sanctioned payments. Despite this, the amounts remain unpaid, violating principles of natural justice and Article 300-A of the Constitution. The respondents admitted the execution of works but attributed the delay in payment to the closure of bills due to year-end activities on March 31, 2019, and stated that payments would be processed upon fresh budget release in FY 2024-2025.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents are legally obligated to release payment for the executed advertising works, including GST, to the petitioner, considering the admitted execution of work and sanction of bills. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the works were executed as per the work orders, bills were submitted and sanctioned, and despite the respondents admitting the execution of work and entitlement to payment, the amounts have not been released. This non-payment, even after sanction, is arbitrary and violates natural justice and constitutional rights. They sought a direction for payment. Respondents' contention: The respondents admitted the execution of works but explained that the bills, though generated and approved by the Treasury, were closed on March 31, 2019, due to year-end activities. They asserted that payments would be processed upon receipt of a fresh budget release order from the Government during the Financial Year 2024-2025. They did not dispute the entitlement to the amounts.