Disposed

Yelamanchili Sandhya v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC20 Nov 2023WP/22669/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the respondents' failure to release Rs.10 lakhs sanctioned for her daughter's education under the YSR VIDESHI VIDYADHARANA scheme. The Court upheld a government plea for time, directing the release of funds within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing Respondents 1 to 5 to release the sanctioned amount of Rs.10 lakhs under the YSR VIDESHI VIDYADHARANA scheme within eight weeks of receipt of a copy of this order.

Yelamanchili Sandhya Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No.22669 of 2023

¶3

Between:-

¶4

Smt. Yelamanchili Sandhya

¶5

…. Petitioner

¶6

And

¶7

The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Special Chief Secretary, Economically Backward Classes Welfare and Development Department and five others.

¶8

…. Respondents

¶9

Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.Peddi Vijaya Bhaskar

¶10

Counsel for the Respondents : G.P. for Social Welfare

¶11

G.P. for Finance and Planning

¶12

ORDER :

¶13

This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not considering the submission for release of the sanctioned amount of Rs.10 lakhs for financial assistance of petitioner’s daughter Yelamanchili Pranavi Chowdary under the scheme of “YSR VIDESHI

¶14

VIDYADHARANA” Application ID No. OV201912120, dated 28.04.2019, which is illegal and arbitrary.

¶15

¶16

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the daughter of the petitioner by name Yelamanchili Pranavi Chowdary was selected under the scheme of “YSR VIDESHI VIDYADHARANA” with Application ID No.OV201912120, dated 28.04.2019, for studying Master of EngineeringElectrical and Computer at Carleton University, Ottawa State in Canada. He further submitted that after completion of all formalities, the petitioner’s daughter went to Canada and completed her Master of Engineering-Electrical and Computer at Carleton University, Ottawa in Canada. In the meantime, the petitioner, so many times, requested the respondents to release the sanctioned amount of Rs.10,00,000/-, but despite lapse of more than 2 years, no amount was released, hence the petitioner was undergoing tremendous hardship to pay the necessary fees and living expenses to her daughter in Canada. Hence, the Writ Petition.

¶18

Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner’s daughter is eligible as per the

¶19

¶20

report submitted by the Vigilance and Enforcement

¶21

Department and requested for three (03) months time for making payment to the petitioner after receipt of the budget from the Government.

¶22

Considering the submissions of both the learned counsel and the written instructions dated 17.10.2023, placed on record by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, stating that the petitioner’s daughter is eligible as per the report submitted by the Vigilance and Enforcement Department, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing Respondent Nos.1 to 5 to release the sanctioned amounts under the scheme of “YSR VIDESHI VIDYADHARANA” within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶23

Consequently, Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶24

________________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

¶25

Date:20.11.2023 Ssv

Yelamanchili Sandhya v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yelamanchili Sandhya v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate bank), Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

State Bank of India Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

State Bank of India Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kotu Prabhakara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Shakir Basha, Vs Prl.Secy., Social Welfare dept., State of A.P.

Nannapuneni Venkateswarlu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh