The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.9617 of 2010 Dated 4th August, 2010 Between: V.Ramakrishna …Petitioner And The Government of A.P., and 2 others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.K.Ramakrishna for Mr.P.Raghavender Reddy Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Education Counsel for respondent No.2: None appeared Counsel for respondent No.3: AGP for Finance & Planning The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, in not paying a sum of Rs.2,53,449/- along with interest in pursuance of agreement No.DB-DM/Junior College-Mandapet/07, dated 23-02-2008, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education representing respondent No.1 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance & Planning representing respondent No.3. The petitioner is a contractor, who was entrusted with certain works for being executed in the Government Junior College at Mandapet, East Godavari District. The said work was completed by the petitioner in March, 2008, and a bill was submitted by him in the office of respondent No.2. Respondent No.2, in turn, forwarded the bill to respondent No.3- Assistant Pay and Accounts Officer, Kakinada, for payment. The said bill was returned by the latter due to non-availability of funds. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the work was executed in March, 2008, the payment has not yet been made to him. The petitioner has filed letter, dated 02-07-2009, addressed by respondent No.2 to respondent No.1 wherein it is inter alia mentioned that after respondent No.3 has returned the bill due to non-availability of funds, the amount was released in favour of the Assistant Pay and Accounts Officer, Dowlaiswaram, instead of respondent No.3 and that the said fact was brought to the notice of respondent No.1 by respondent No.2 vide his letters, dated 22-05-2008 and 20-03-2009, and that despite lapse of more than 1 ½ years, the grant was not released. Respondent No.2 has, therefore, requested respondent No.1 to release the grant for making payment to the contractor i.e., the petitioner herein. No counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of any of the respondents. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleaders, representing respondent Nos.1 and 3, have not disputed that respondent No.2 has addressed the above- mentioned letter, dated 02-07-2009, to respondent No.1. In my opinion, when the right of the petitioner to receive the amount under the contract is not in dispute, there can be no justification for respondent No.1 not to release the amount payable to him. No reasons have been assigned by respondent No.1 for not responding to the repeated requests of respondent No.2 to release the bill amount. In the light of the facts noted above, the Writ Petition is allowed. Respondent No.1 is directed to release the bill amount payable to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Within a period of one month thereafter, respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall make the payment to the petitioner. C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J Dated 4th August, 2010 lur