(Prayer: 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 to issue an appropriate writ or order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the admitted bills amount of Rs.7,95,307/- (4,95,021 plus3,00,286/-) in respect of execution of two works for 1). Construction of CC Drain from J. Mallikarjuna Rao house to PWD Canal of Pedaravuru (V) in Tenali (M) (RWS-5078-1623) vide Agreement No. /2023- 24, dated 07.09.2023 and 2). Construction of CC drain from Battula Tirupal House to ZP Road in Chinnapalli in Pedaravuru (V) in Tenali (M) (RWS-5078- 1620) vide Agreement No. 07.09.2023 under GGMP grant in Pedaravuru Village, Pedaravuru Grama Panchayat in Tenali Mandal, Guntur District, which is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violative of principles of natural justice, consequently direct the respondents to release the bills amount of Rs.7,95,307/-(4,95,021 plus 3,00,286/-) due to the petitioner in respect of execution of two works forthwith interest of 18Percent and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to release the bill amount of Rs.7,95,307/- (4,95,021+3,00,286/-) towards the execution of two works for 1). “Construction of CC Drain from J. Mallikarjuna Rao house to PWD Canal of Pedaravuru (V) in Tenali (M) (RWS-5078-1623) vide Agreement No. /2023-24, dated 07.09.2023 and 2). “Construction of CC drain from Battula Tirupal House to ZP Road in Chinnapalli in Pedaravuru (V) in Tenali (M) (RWS-5078-1620) vide Agreement No. /2023-24, dated 07.09.2023 under GGMP grant in Pedaravuru Village, Pedaravuru Grama Panchayat in Tenali Mandal, Guntur District, immediately, pending disposal of main writ petition and pass)

1. Heard, Sri Siva Sankara Rao Borra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents 1 to 4, 6 and 7, and Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the 5th respondent.

2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.7,95,307/- (Rs.4,95,021/- + Rs.3,00,286/-) payable to the petitioner in relation to the works executed i.e., 1) Construction of CC Drain from J.Mallikarjuna Rao house to PWD Canal of Pedaravuru Village, Tenali Mandal vide Agreement No…/2023-24 dated 07.09.2023 and 2) Construction of CC Drain from Battula Tirupal House to ZP Road in Chinnapalli in Pedaravuru Village, Tenali Mandal vide Agreement No…/2023-24 dated 07.09.2023 as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer, RWS&S Division, Guntur –6th respondent dated 06.04.2026.

4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works for a total value of Rs.7,95,307/- and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions of Rs.97,639/-, is Rs.6,97,668/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the same.

6. The petitioner has paid a Court Fee of only Rs.100/-, and the petitioner shall pay the deficit Court Fee of Rs.100/- within one week from the receipt of the order copy and file a memo to that effect, failing which the Registry will take necessary steps for payment of the deficit Court Fee.

7. Thus, as seen from the instructions, there is no dispute regarding the execution of the aforementioned works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.6,97,668/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors v. Chief General Manager & Ors1, it was held at Para No.8 as under:

                  “Be that as it may, the High court has not dealt with the merits of the writ petition. Moreover, it is not an inviolable rule that no money claim can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Non-payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the part of respondents and for claiming the same, a writ petition may lie. Further, throwing a writ petition on ground of availability of alternative remedy after 10 years, particularly, when parties have exchanged their affidavits, is not the correct course unless there are disputed questions of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.”

8. Given the instructions furnished by the Executive Engineer, RWS&S Division, Guntur –6th respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs.6,97,668/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of aforementioned work, within two (02) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.