Kucheti Madhusudhana Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the non-payment of admitted dues to the petitioner was arbitrary and required the respondents to expedite the payment process. The Court acknowledged its previous pronouncements on similar matters, emphasizing that such delays were unacceptable. The Court directed the respondents to complete the verification process within three weeks from the date of receiving a copy of the order. Following the verification, the respondents were ordered to pay the amounts due to the petitioner within six weeks. Crucially, the Court stipulated that if the verification process was not completed within the stipulated three weeks, the respondents were to pay the amounts due without seeking further time for verification. The Court also clarified that the petitioner was at liberty to pursue claims for interest, if any, in an appropriate forum. No specific GST provisions were discussed in detail, but the context involved payments including GST.

Facts

The petitioner, a civil contractor, had completed various contract works and submitted final bills for payment, including GST. The respondents withheld certain amounts from these payments. The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition, contending that despite the respondents admitting the petitioner's entitlement to the withheld sums, no payment was being made, which the petitioner argued was arbitrary and high-handed. The petitioner sought the intervention of the Court to secure these payments. The respondents, represented by the Standing Counsel for Municipalities, stated that they were verifying the petitioner's claims and would be in a position to make payments only after the verification was complete.

Key Issues

1. Whether the non-payment of admitted dues to the petitioner by the respondents, despite the petitioner having completed the contract works and submitted final bills, is arbitrary and warrants interference by this Court under its writ jurisdiction? The petitioner argued that the non-payment of admitted dues was arbitrary and high-handed, necessitating judicial intervention. The petitioner 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 had taken a similar view regarding the arbitrary nature of such non-payments and directed the clearing of dues. The respondents contended that they were in the process of verifying the petitioner's claims and that payment would only be made after the completion of this verification process. They did not dispute the petitioner's entitlement to payment in principle but sought time for internal procedural completion.