Atluru Yallamma vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court noted that there was no dispute regarding the execution of the work by the petitioner. However, payment was withheld due to the lack of GST details. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner would approach the concerned authority to submit the GST details and requested a direction for payment thereafter. In light of this submission, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the concerned authority and furnish the GST details. Upon receipt of these details, the concerned authority was directed to process the petitioner's bill expeditiously, within a period of four weeks from the date of receiving the GST details. No order as to costs was made.

Facts

The petitioner, Atluru Yallamma, filed a writ petition challenging the respondents' failure to pay Rs. 5,70,000/- for works executed by her, specifically the C.C. road from Atloor to Patha Atloor. Administrative sanction was granted on 16.10.2018, and a supplementary agreement was executed in favor of the petitioner on 17.02.2021 for Rs. 4,70,000/-. The petitioner contended that the works were completed satisfactorily within the stipulated time, but payment was withheld. The respondents, through the Assistant Government Pleader, stated that the bill was rejected for want of GST details, which are mandatory for uploading the bill. The petitioner then agreed to furnish the GST details to the concerned authority.

Key Issues

1. Whether the withholding of payment to the petitioner for the executed works is illegal and arbitrary, considering the petitioner's entitlement to the amount. (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and contractual obligations). 2. Whether the respondents are justified in rejecting the bill for payment due to the non-submission of GST details by the petitioner. (Question of law, concerning statutory requirements for payment processing under GST regime). Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that the works were executed satisfactorily and within the stipulated time, and the withholding of payment after bill preparation and entry in the measurement book was illegal and arbitrary, causing irreparable loss and grave hardship. The petitioner relied on the fact that the work was approved and the agreement was executed. Respondents' contentions: The respondents contended that the bill was rejected for want of GST details, as submitting GST details is mandatory for uploading the bill and processing payment. They referred to internal instructions emphasizing the mandatory nature of GST for bill uploading.