The High Court · 2025

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH. BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: 10661 OF 2023 Between: RK lnfracorp Private Limited, Regd. Off N.o.'l-8-865, 14l3Rl-' Fl/o Flat.No?92, Lir*fiiiEnLt"re, Opp.Nllt/S Pun'iagutta, Hyderabad - 500082 Rep' bv its GPA Holder Sri. ttl.Vinod Kumar ReddY ...PETITIONER AND 1 2 State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Roads and Buildings Department Erlurnmanzil, Hyderabad -500 082. The Chief Engineer (R andB) Administration, 7th floor, 0/o the Englneer-in- Chief (R and E) Erruhmanzii, Hyderabad-500082

3. The Superintending Engineer (R and B), Regional Office Rural Circle Balkampet, Hyderabad - 500016.

4. The District R and B officer Roads Division, Goshamahal Hyderabad 500012 5. The Pay and Accounts Officer (Works and Projects), Ranga Reddy Diskict Woman Rights Building, ll floor, Nampally, Hyderabad - 5000S5 ...RESPONDENTS 'Petition under Article 226 of Ihe constitution of lndia 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 direction more particularly a writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the Respondents in withholding an amount of Rs'32,61 ,010/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs sixty one Thousand and Ten Ri.rpees only) towards balance security deposit despite making innumerable representations as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1 )(g) of the constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent herein to release Rs.32,61 ,010i- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Thirty sixty one Thousand and Ten Rupees orrly) with'interest 24percent p.a. from the date the amounts fell due. IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition unde r Section 151 cPC praying that in ther circums;tances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court rnay be pleased to direct the Responcernts herein to consider the representations lf the petitioner and release the anr()unt of Rs.32,61,0101 (Rupees Thirty Two l.-akhs Sixty One Thousand and Terr Rupees only) towards balance security icpostt in a time bound manner Counsel for the Petitioner : M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A - WRIT PETITIONS No. 10661 OF 2023 ,, ORDER: This Writ Petition chailenges that action of the respondents in withholding Rs.32,61,010/- towards balance finai security deposit despite making innumerable representations. Consequently, petitioner seeks a direction to release the said amount with interest aL 24o/" per annum from the date the amount fell due.

2. Petitioner, it is stated, had successfully and satisfactorily executed the works, details of works, date of completion, iast date of defect liability have been mentioncd in paragraph 3 of the affrdavit, by entenng into corresponding agreements, duly depositing amount towards hnal security deposit which has to be returned in terms o[ Clause 42.3.1 of the Agreement. in terms of the above clause, the dcfective liability period of 24 months is also over, however, respondents, have been dodging the payments for no reason. In fact, petitioner is stated to have submitted umpteen number of regresentations, both oral and written, the iatest being the one I a dated 2!1.0,1.2C23 requesting release of amounLs horvever, respondents irre not acting upon the same. Ihis Coi-irt. bv orcler dated 18.04.20211. clirected 3. re sponrlent s lo consider representation of ' petiti,-'r'r.:r clated

29.O3.2O):t : nd pass orders r,"ithin ten days fronr th.: date of receipt o[ a r:op.v of the said order.

4. lhe 4d' respondent fi1ed counter-affidavi . stating rhat tl-rt' lle.rril\; Erecutive Engineer (R&B), Sharnshalrad Sub- Divis:o;: vi<le lerter dated 08.O2.2023 submittecl ltor m 64 to releasc Ellvlii irrr 1.he works done by pe titioner to I ht' 'ixecutive Engineer f RliB), Ranga Reddy District; EMD and F ID hand rcceipt for arr a mount of Rs.32,61,01O/- u'as ;ubinitLcd tci Pay anri Ac'-cur. r: Olficer', Ranga Reddy on 19.O4.2)23 r,iCr Division Tokerr i{o. .2+A3276349 for Rs.32,61,O1O/ rncl tire same is under ..'o:ru,deration for approval of the Clo','t: i:rr ment of Tclangana ::r d l,aiting for approval. To the sarne e flec , leetrned (]overnrnenl irleader for Finance Department also plac:ci before tl'ris Cour-t k,i-rcr dated 06.O7.2023 addressed b',- Par. & {ccounts Officcr. [W&t'). Ranga Redd]r J

5. Concurring with the said submissions, learned counsel for petitioner M/ s Indus Law Firm filed a memo of calculation statirrg that during the pendency of Writ Petition and in terms of the interim order dated 18.04.2023, respondent authorities have remitted principal amount of Rs.32,6i,01O/- but failed to deposit interest amount accrued over a period of time. Hence, he seeks a direction to respondents to pay the interest component. l,earned counsel relies on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in TAMGEDCO Ltd.. u, T.T" Industries Limitedl and that of this Court in M/s Raghaua. HES-Navaguga (JV) o. State of Telangana (W.P.No. 12425 of 2023) and contends that petitioner rs entitled to interest for the delayed payment.

6. Evidently, Clause 43 of the Agreement deals with 'Inleresl on Money due to the contractor'. It specifies, 't\ro omissian by the Exeantiue Engineer or the Sub-diuisional Officer to pay tLe amount due upon certificotes shall uitiate or make uoid the contract, nor shall the contractor be entitted. to interest upon anA guardntee fund or paAinents in arrear, nor on anA balance tuhich mag, on the final settlement of his accounts, found to be 'p0tz; s scc sso ,1 4 due to lti.m'. 'l l:c said clause clearlv says thal contr'.c'or i:; not er-rtitleci lc i ,.terest on an1. payments in ari r-ar no1 on any balai-ict: rviri,: r are iound to be due. 7 . ' i t hr: contra.t contains specili.- cli:.,rs e rrhich expre ssr\ ir:,l s pa-.'ment ol interest, then, it i( not c,r€ n for the Court to grt tL pendent lile interest. This deci:;icn is s upported b1, the juilgr rcnt ir Union of India u. Manr ai Ente'rprises2, reiied on br' tht: learned counsel for respondenls. F{ere, it is also to bc i,:ir:e i,- irt:-ecl thal - .cJrty tL, a f ontrac. is crrl .' legallv bound t.o rui'il thc specific duties and resport s i1-lrii ii:s explicitl-1,'- outliired rr,:tirir-i lhe u,ntten terms and cc'nditionr'r of the agreeflrcrt r:. ,cr cannot be held liable for an-'thine. c utside of tho-se -.iatrcr ir;:rramcters; essentia.llv, the Court r.,,i1l intt rpret the contraci sr-ir'ri1 b:rscd on iire agrecd-L1po[ tetlns :Lnr: rvill not imposc acllir r-,,i-r..il oi-r[galions not clearl], clehne,1in t]:e contract- B. in ine iight of iire same, thc judgn,ents relied on by lcarrnecl ccu rsol fof petitroner, in somewhat difierent slt of facts and cir,:utn;.a.nces. are of no help to the casrl or: iiai'rd. This Court, i.hc:-r i:rie , of the considered opinion tha- pefrl.:o;ter is not ' i:{r-2 ) : sc.t, -, ; 5 entitled to claim interest on the Earnest Money Deposit, hence, trVrit Petition is liable to be dismissed 9 10 The Writ Petition is accordingly, dismissed. No Consequently, the misceilaqeous Applications, if any shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. L. LAKSHMI BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Q'tXo sEcrhrl "drilden

1. One CC to M/S.INDUS LAW FIRM' Advocate' [OPUC] 2.TwoCCstoGPFoRROADSBUlLDlNGS,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana. [OUT] 3. Two CD CoPies. BSK GJP I I I i l i l l To, HIGH COURT DATED:1210?-12025 ORDER WP.No.10661 of 2023 I .ljr ri-r .':;' e ,J 1ul. a s..s \\ -' \ )'': ..:- _--:;-:: _rr;- \ ,,! DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS / /rs /a 45 3d i I t l ;