M/S. MALLISAI ENTERPRISES v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed off
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Cause title
MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SRI KRISHNA ENCLAVE GORANTIA, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. DIRECTOR OF 2 VS, J W.P.67 of 2026
6. THE CHILAKALURIPETA MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY COMMISSIONER, CHILAKALURIPETA, PALNADU DISTRICT. ITS
7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, CHILAKALURIPETA MUNICIPALITY, CHILAKALURIPETA, PALNADU DISTRICT. ENGINEER/MUNICIPAL ...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 to issue a Writ, Order, or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the total due payments of Rs.35,23,227/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e.. Agreement No. 123/2024-25, Dt 03.01.2025 and vide M.Book. No. 64/2023-24, above (01) work was sanction under 15 Finance Grant Funds, total pending bills amount of Rs.35,23,227/- in Chilakaluripet Municipality through the Agreements ,as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to release the pending bills total amount of Rs.35,23,227/- with interest at 18 percent for the pending bills forthwith for the above said works executed by the petitioner 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 pleased to direct respondents to consider for pending bills of Rs.35,23,227/- with interest @ 18 percent for the works executed by the petitioner for the various works under 15th Finance Grant Funds, in Chilakaluripet Municipality through the Agreements forthwith, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. ANNAMNEEDI BALAKRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: 3 VS, J W.P.67 of 2026
ORDER:-
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has awarded the work of supply of procurement of Pump Sets for Rapid filling of SS Tanks in Chilakaluripet Municipality vide Agreement No.123/2024-25 dated 03.01.2025.
The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner duly executed the works and thereafter submitted final bills for an amount of Rs.35,23,227/-. It is submitted that the said final bills were duly endorsed by the competent authority. A statement detailing the works executed by the petitioner was prepared, and the progress of the works was recorded in the M-book. However, in spite of the completion of all procedural formalities, the payment towards the completed works has not been released till date.
Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing Counsel representing for Municipal Corporation.
During the course of hearing, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation does not dispute the submissions made by the petitioner with respect to the completion of works undertaken.
Considering the submissions, the concerned respondents are hereby directed to verify and release the payments due payable to the petitioner as 4 VS, J W.P.67 of 2026 expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Operative part
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 05.01.2026 LSP
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed off
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 05 Jan 2026. The bench was V SUJATHA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.