Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Llr Constructions vs The State Of Ap on 2 September, 2025
::1::
APHC010375742025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3329]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU
NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 19253/2025
Between:
1. LLR CONSTRUCTIONS, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PROPRIETOR SRI LOKESWARA REDDY, AGED 54 YEARS,
OCC CONTRACTOR, 5-19/1, MATYAM PAIPALLE (V)
MUTTUKURU PANCHAYAT, THAVANAMPALLE (M),
CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR
DISTRICT.
2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR
DISTRICT
3. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH, NH -16, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
::2::
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, CHITTOOR
DISTRICT, AT CHITTOOR.
5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, CHITTOOR,
CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
6. THE MATTAPALLI GRAMPANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY, MATTAPALLE, IRALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR
DISTRIC
7. THE CHIEF PLANNING OFFICER, CHITTOOR COILETORATE,
CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
8. THE ASSISTANT PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, CHITTOOR,
CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High
Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ, order or direction
more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS for
declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the final bill
amount of Rs. 1,42,640/- to the petitioner, for the works Construction
of compound wall to community Hall at Mattapalle Gram Panchayat in
Irala Mandal, executed under Chief Minister Development Funds as
illegal, arbitrary and violative of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh
Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and unconstitutional and consequently direct
the respondents to release the final bill amount of Rs.1,42,640/- to the
petitioner forthwith and to pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. RAMESH BABU TALLURI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING
::3::
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
W.P.No.19253 of 2025
This Court made the following
ORDER:
The petitioner had been awarded the contract of work(s) under the subject scheme in Chittoor District. After execution of the said contract, a final bill was prepared for a sum of Rs.1,42,640/- as per the sanctioned orders. 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.
2. It is the contention of the petitioner that even though the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of Rs.1,28,317/- 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.
3. 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 view that such non-payment of dues ::4::
is arbitrary and that such dues need to be cleared by the respondents at the earliest.
4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader placed on record written instructions submitted by the Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Chittoor, wherein, it is admitted that the petitioner is entitled for an amount of Rs.1,28,317/-. It is further stated that uploading of bills to the PAO is under progress. Soon after the bills were uploaded, the bill amount entitled by the petitioner will be paid to the petitioner.
5. In view of the facts and circumstances submitted in the affidavit, and the directions of this Court in various cases and after hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the amount of Rs.1,28,317/- to the petitioner.
6. As far as interest component is concerned, if there is any subsisting clause in the agreement/work order envisaging payment or non-payment of interest upon any amount which is due and payable, the same is binding upon both the parties. In the absence of any clause with regard to interest component in the agreement, the respondents are directed to release the amount along with the interest @ 6% per annum on delayed payment, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021 ::5::
and batch dated 12.10.2023 if not paid, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It would also be open to the petitioner to agitate its claim for higher rate of interest and due amount, if any payable by the respondents, in an appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
_________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 02.09.2025 krk ::6::
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 115 W.P.No.19253 of 2025 02.09.2025 krk