V Venkatadri vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court noted that for serial numbers 1 to 3, the bills were paid, and EMD and FSD were also paid. Therefore, the writ petition did not require to be allowed for these works. However, for serial numbers 4 to 6, where the bills were paid but EMD and FSD were yet to be paid, the Court allowed the writ petition. The Court directed the respondents to return the EMD and FSD to the petitioner, along with GST, and also to pay interest on the amount payable for work done as per the entitlement, referencing the judgment of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021 and batch of cases dated 12.10.2023. This direction was to be complied with within two months from the receipt of the order. The Court also stated that it was open for the petitioner to agitate the claim for a higher rate of interest, if any, before an appropriate forum. No order as to costs was made.

Facts

The petitioner, V Venkatadri, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents (State of Andhra Pradesh and others) to return the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and Full Security Deposit (FSD) along with interest, and also to pay interest on the amount due for works executed under the 'Neeru Chettu' scheme. The petitioner cited several agreements dated between October 2017 and January 2019. The petitioner contended that despite the respondents admitting the entitlement to the amounts, no payment was made, which was arbitrary. The respondents, through the learned Government Pleader, provided instructions from the Executive Engineer, I.B Division, Penukonda, detailing the status of various bills. The instructions indicated that for serial numbers 1 to 3, the bills were paid, and EMD and FSD were also paid. For serial numbers 4 to 6, the bills were paid, but EMD and FSD were yet to be paid.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the respondents in not returning the EMD and FSD, and not paying interest on the amount due for works executed under the 'Neeru Chettu' scheme, is illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of the principles of natural justice and constitutional provisions (Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21)? 2. Whether the respondents are liable to return the EMD and FSD along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of submitting the bill to the final payment, as per the petitioner's claim and relevant government orders and court judgments? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the non-payment of admitted dues and the failure to return EMD/FSD were arbitrary and high-handed. They relied on G.O.RT.No.266 dated 15-02-2021, Memo No.1279341/FMU-WR.I/2020 dated 18-02-2021, and a previous order of the High Court in W.A.No.724 of 2021. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents, while admitting the petitioner's claim, placed on record instructions from the Executive Engineer. These instructions indicated that for some works (serial numbers 1-3), EMD and FSD had already been paid. For other works (serial numbers 4-6), the bills were paid, but EMD and FSD were yet to be paid.