Ubs Infraa Projects Private Limited vs. The State Of Ap

Held

The Court held that the respondents' action in not releasing the payment for the executed works was unjust and not tenable, given the undisputed position regarding the completion of works. The Court found that the petitioner was lawfully entitled to the payment. While the petitioner sought interest, the Court noted that the petitioner could raise a claim for the interest component before the appropriate forum if advised. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents to arrange for the payment of the due amount to the petitioner, after effecting statutory deductions, expeditiously, and at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of the order. The Court explicitly left the claim for interest to be pursued separately.

Facts

The petitioner, UBS Infraa Projects Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging the respondents' action of not releasing a bill amount of Rs.1,53,99,748/- for works executed under Agreement C.R.No.21/2021-22 dated 01.07.2022. The petitioner contended that the works were completed to the satisfaction of the authorities, but the payment was withheld, causing prejudice and loss. The respondents, through a counter-affidavit filed by the 5th respondent, admitted that the work was completed within the stipulated time and the bill was finalized. The counter-affidavit stated that the net amount of Rs.1,53,99,748/- was arrived at after recoveries for QC and statutory deductions, including GST. The bill was uploaded on the CFMS portal and was awaiting fund clearance. The Court noted the undisputed execution of works and non-payment of bills.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents' action in withholding the payment of Rs.1,53,99,748/- for the works executed by the petitioner is illegal and arbitrary, and if so, what consequential directions should be issued? (Question of law and fact, concerning the contractual obligations and administrative actions). The petitioner argued that the works were completed satisfactorily and the non-release of the lawfully entitled bill amount resulted in serious prejudice and irreparable loss. The petitioner sought a direction for payment of the amount along with interest at 16.5% per annum. The respondents, in their counter-affidavit, did not dispute the execution of the works and confirmed that the bill amount was finalized after statutory deductions, including GST, and was awaiting fund clearance. The respondents did not explicitly argue against the petitioner's claim for the principal amount but indicated the process for clearance.