M/S. Swathi Engineering Company vs. The State Of Ap
Held
The Court held that the non-payment of admitted dues by the respondents was arbitrary and required intervention. Referencing its own previous orders, including the judgment in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch, the Court reiterated that such delays are unacceptable. The Court directed the respondents to complete the verification process within three weeks of receiving a copy of the order. Subsequently, payments due to the petitioner were to be made within six weeks of the verification's completion. The Court further clarified that if the verification process was not completed within the stipulated three weeks, the respondents were obligated to pay the due amounts without seeking further time for verification. The petitioner was also granted liberty to pursue claims for interest in an appropriate forum. No order as to costs was made.
Facts
The petitioner, a contractor, had executed emergency repair works for the Prakasam Barrage, Vijayawada, under various agreements. A final bill of Rs.28,07,507/- was submitted for payment. The respondents, however, had not made the payment despite admitting the petitioner's entitlement. The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition, alleging arbitrary and high-handed non-payment. The respondents contended that they were verifying the petitioner's claims and would process payments only after completion of this verification.
Key Issues
1. Whether the non-payment of admitted dues to the petitioner by the respondents is arbitrary and requires the interference of this Court, as contemplated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the non-payment of admitted dues was arbitrary and high-handed, necessitating judicial intervention. They relied on previous orders of the High Court, including a judgment dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch, which held similar non-payments as arbitrary and directed their clearance. Respondents' arguments: The learned Government Pleader submitted that the respondent authorities were in the process of verifying the petitioner's claims and that payment would be made only after the completion of this verification.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.3946 of 2023
ORDER:
The petitioner had been awarded contracts for Emergency repairs such as removal of stroked sand boat in Vent No.68 and arresting leakages in Vent No.68 and 69 and other various works during the floods of Prakasam Barrage, Vijayawada under various agreements. After execution of the said work, a final bill for Rs.28,07,507/- had been prepared and submitted to the concerned for payment. As the payment of the said amount has not been made by the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of this writ petition.
It is the contention of the petitioner that even though the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of the aforesaid sums of money, no payment is being made. The petitioner contends that such non-payment of money is clearly arbitrary and high-handed requiring the interference of this Court.
This Court, in various orders, including the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch had taken the
2 view that such non-payment of dues is
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.