IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 8650 of 2005 Between: Sri Saibaba Vaddi Uppara Sankshema Sangham, rep. by its President, G.China Narasaiah, S/o. Bobbili, Hindu, aged about 58 years, R/o. Pentapadu V & M, W.G.District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, W.G.District at Eluru. 2 The Deputy Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division, Tadepalligudem. 3 The Assistant Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Pantapadu, W.G.Dist. 4 The M.R.O., Pantapadu Mandal, W.G.District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ a Mandamus, declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents as illegal and ultra vires to the provisions of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India besides directing the respondents to release the rice due under the Agreement dt.2.7.2002 to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible within a time-bound programme and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.S.R.ANJANEYALU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : ORDER The petitioner which is a society was entrusted the work of laying of road from Mudunuru to Bodapadu fields under an agreement dated 2.7.2002 executed by the 2nd respondent-Deputy Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division, Tadepalligudem. The work was approved for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on the ratio of 30% cash and 70% rice component payable at the rate of 10 kgs to each labourer per day. The petitioner states that the work in question was executed as per the agreement and after completion of the same, the cash component of Rs.30,000/- was paid. However, the rice component towards 70% of the work was not released in spite of several representations made to all the concerned authorities. Hence, the present writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal. Rule Nisi was ordered by this Court on 8.6.2005. Though notices are served on all the respondents, no counter-affidavit is filed by any of them disputing the petitioner’s claim. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. It is clear from the order of the second respondent dated 2.7.2002 that the work in question was allotted to the petitioner- society and an agreement was also entered into to that effect agreeing to pay 10 kgs of rice to each labourer per day towards work done. Hence, the respondents are bound to release the same for distribution to the members of the petitioner society. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the rice or its value payable to the petitioners as per the conditions of the agreement dated 2.7.2002, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case there is any objection for such release, the reasons shall be communicated to the petitioner within the period specified above. No costs. ___________ 05-12-2008 rkk