Srm Constructions vs. The State Of Ap

Held

The Court held that the non-payment of admitted dues to the petitioner was arbitrary and directed the respondents to release the payment for the works executed under the specified agreements. The Court reasoned that based on its previous pronouncements, including the judgment in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch, such non-payment is unacceptable. Furthermore, the Court directed the payment of interest at 6% per annum on the amount due, referencing a Division Bench judgment in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021 and batch. The Court also clarified that it would be open for the petitioner to pursue a claim for a higher rate of interest in an appropriate forum. The operative direction was to release the amount along with interest within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, a contractor, approached the High Court by way of a writ petition seeking payment for contract works executed under four agreements in West Godavari District. The petitioner contended that despite the respondents admitting the entitlement to payment, no funds had been released. The respondents, through the learned Government Pleader, admitted the claim but explained that payment was delayed due to the non-release of budget by the Government. They assured that payments would be made once the budget was released. The Court had previously taken a view in similar matters that non-payment of dues is arbitrary and requires prompt clearance.

Key Issues

1. Whether the non-payment of admitted dues to the petitioner for contract works executed under Agreements No.71/2022-23, 68/2022-23, 69/2022-23, and 70/2022-23 is arbitrary and requires the intervention of this Court, as contended by the petitioner? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the respondents admitted the entitlement to payment but failed to make the payment, which is arbitrary and high-handed, necessitating judicial intervention. The petitioner relied on previous orders of the Court, including a learned Single Judge's judgment in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch, which held non-payment of dues as arbitrary. Revenue/State's Contention: The learned Government Pleader for Irrigation admitted the petitioner's claim and placed on record instructions stating that payment was delayed due to the non-release of budget by the Government. The Government assured that payments would be made upon budget release. The respondents did not rely on any specific provision, circular, or precedent in their argument regarding the delay.