IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION Nos:27968; 27970; 28001 & 28004 of 2007 WRIT PETITION No: 27968 of 2007 Between: M.V.Bhaksar Reddy, S/o M.Ramanujala Reddy, R/o Sanjeeva Nagar, Tadipatri, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Anantapur, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus by directing the respondents to refund the EMD and FSD of an amount of Rs.30,600/- and Rs.55,279/- which comes total of Rs.85,879/- with 18% interest of Delay in non refund the EMD and FSD since 8/2003 onwards till date and to pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.T.BAPUJI RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. WRIT PETITION NO : 27970 of 2007 Between: K. Golla Reddy, S/o. K. Kondaiah, R/o. Dimmagudi Village, Pedavodugur Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Anantapur, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus by directing the respondents to refund the EMD and FSD of an amount of Rs.1,55,000/- and Rs.1,71,427/- which comes total of Rs.3,26,427/- with 18% interest of Delay in non refund the EMD and FSD since 8/2003 onwards till date and to pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.T.BAPUJI RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. WRIT PETITION NO : 28001 of 2007 Between: P.Bala Nagi Reddy S/o. Vasudeva Reddy R/o. Ananthapur, Ananthapur District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department Anantapur, Anantapur District 2 The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Ananatapur Anantapur District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus by directing the respondents to refund the EMD and FSD of an amount of Rs.1,67,275/- and Rs.1,98,489/- which comes total of Rs.3,55,764/- with 18% interest of Delay in non refund the EMD and FSD since 8/2003 onwards till date. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.T.BAPUJI RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. WRIT PETITION NO : 28004 of 2007 Between: K.P.Ranga Reddy, s/o K.Golla Reddy, R/o Dimmagudi Village, Pedavodugur Mandal, Ananthapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Anantapur, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus by directing the respondents to refund the EMD and FSD of an amount of Rs.90,000/- and Rs.96,311/- which comes total of Rs.1,86,311/- with 18% interest of Delay in non refund the EMD and FSD Since 8/2003 onwards till date and to pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.T.BAPUJI RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nod: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for the respondents. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that in respect of the works executed by them certain undisputed refundable amounts have not been refunded to them and accordingly the 1st respondent-Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Anantapur addressed a letter in Rc.238/02-3/A7, dated 23-06-2007, duly indicating the amount refundable to the petitioners. The statement showing the list of contractors and particulars of the deposits in Panchayat Raj Division is as follows: STATEMENT SHOWING LIST OF CONTRACTORS AND PARTICULARS OF DEPOSITS DUE IN PANCHAYAT RAJ DIVISION, ANANTAPUR S.No N a m e of the work Name of Grant Deposit amount M.Book No. Name of the Contractor 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Repai rs of 6 roads in Gooty Sub-Division, Package No.IV SRRM 326427 14/99/APR K.Gollareddy Contractor, Dimagudi 2 Repai rs to 6 roads in Gooty Sub-Division, Package No.IF (RRM New Roads) NRRM 186311 60/99/APR K.P.Rangareddy Contractor, Dimmagudi 3 Prov iding B.T. to road from Pamidi- Vajrakarur road to Konepalli NABARD 365764 32/2000/APR P.Balanagireddy Contractor, Anantapur 4 F o r m a t i o n of New Roads Package No.V of Tadipatri Sub-Division NRRM 85879 120/98/APR M.V.Bhaskar Reddy, Contractor, Tadipatri TOTAL 964381 3. It is stated that pursuant to the said letter of the 1st respondent, dated 23-06- 2007, addressed to the Chief Engineer, Panchayat Raj, the Chief Engineer also addressed a letter to the Government vide letter No.BPR/1/129/PD/A/C/2003, dated 26-06-2007, requesting the Government to permit the release of EMD and FSD for a sum of Rs.9.64 lakhs for the available grant of RRM for the financial year 2007-08, but the amounts have not been paid so far. 4. I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, but however, if there is no dispute with regard to the refund of the EMD and FSD amounts as claimed by the petitioners, respondents may consider the case of the petitioners with regard to the undisputed amounts and take appropriate action within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. Accordingly, Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J 29th February, 2008 Tsy To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}