IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 1265 of 2009 Between: Md.Azam Ali S/o.late Sadiq Ali R/o.8-3-237/3, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, Hyderabad Metro Water Supply & Sewerage Board, Mytrivihar, HUDA Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 2 The Director Finance, Hyderabad Metro Water Supply & Sewerage Board, Mytrivihar, HUDA Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .....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 an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in withholding the final payment with regard to the contract work vide No.CGM/O&M.C.II/T3/2007-08/1766 dated 3.8.2007 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to release the final payment with regard to the contract work vide No.CGM/O&M.C.II/T3/2007-08/1766 dated 3.8.2007. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SRINIVAS CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.V.SUDHAKAR REDDY The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.1265 of 2009 Order: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent-Board in withholding the final payment with regard to the contract work, vide No.CGM/O&M.C.II/T3/2007-08/1766, dated 03.08.2007, and consequently seeking a direction to the respondent-Board to release final payment. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Board. A reading of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition would disclose that there are disputes between the petitioner and the respondent-Board with regard to release of final payment as per the work order, dated 03.08.2007. Since the writ petition raises disputed questions of fact, the same cannot be gone into by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If the respondent-Board withholds any amount contrary to the terms and conditions of the work order, he can file a representation to the respondent-Board, and if the respondent-Board fails to act thereon, the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the competent civil Court. I seen no merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail the alternative remedies available to him under law. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 04.02.2009 VGB