Vundavelli Thimma Reddy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Oct 2023WP/22692/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the non-release of Rs.10 lakhs under the 'NTR Videshi Vidya Deevena' scheme. On the respondent's acknowledgment of the beneficiary's eligibility and readiness to pay within three months, the Court directed the authorities to release the sanctioned amount.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to release the sanctioned amount of Rs.10,00,000/ to the petitioner within three months from the date of the order.

Vundavelli Thimma Reddy, Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.22692 OF 2023

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶5

“... . declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing financial assistance of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) to the daughter of the petitioner Vundavelli Ushasree as per G.O.Ms.No.174 dated 07.12.2017 R/w G.O.Ms.No.29 dated 27.08.2016 despite sanction of funds by the Government under Application ID No.OV2018120269 as illegal, arbitrary violation of principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to release financial assistance of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) to the daughter of the petitioner Vundavelli Ushasree forthwith under Application ID No.OV2018120269 and to pass ....”

¶6

Heard Sri Ramesh Babu Talluri, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare.

¶7

Learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare on instructions submitted that, in the enquiry conducted by the Vigilance Department the petitioner‟s daughter was found eligible and entitled for extending the benefit of „NTR Videshi Vidya Deevena‟, as such the authorities have admitted to release/pay the sanctioned amount to the candidate and sought three(03) months time for payment of the amount.

¶8

To the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner reported no objection.

¶9

¶10

Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel into

¶11

consideration and as the respondent authorities are also ready to release the sanctioned amount to the petitioner‟s daughter as she was found eligible, instead of keeping this writ petition pending, this Court is inclined to dispose of the same with the following direction:

¶12

The respondents are directed to release the sanctioned amount to

¶13

the petitioner at the earliest, and at any rate, within a period of three (03)

¶14

months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶15

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of . No costs.

¶16

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶17

________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶18

09.10.2023, BRS

Vundavelli Thimma Reddy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vundavelli Thimma Reddy, v. 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

Nune Narasimha Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Rrr Constructions Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chintada Srinivasa Rao Vs the State of Ap

M/s. Balaji Energy Pvt. Ltd, Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P Limited

Dama Haribabu (Died) Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

P Bhaskar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh