Chinna Kandukuri James Prasanth Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Social Welfare (Ed) Department, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi,^Amaravati, Guntur District. v

¶12

The Director of Social Welfare, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Opp Manipal Hospital, 3'^^ Floor TG^Plaza, Tadepalli, Guntur^District.

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, particularly^one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the balance amount of 3 installments to an^{extentof(pound)} 19,477.50 equivalent to INR 21,33,175.80 Financial^{Assistancetotheson} of the Petitioner as sanctioned by respondents under^{Overseaseducation} financial assistance scheme (Jagana.nna Videshi Vidhya^{DeevanaScheme} as illegal, arbitrary and against to the purport of scheme and contrary to the policy decision of the government and consequently direct the Respondents to release the finaneiai Assistance to the son of the petitioner for a (pound) 19,477.50 equivalent to INR 21,33,175.80 for sum of pursuing his course under said scheme or orders

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to release an amount of (pound)l9,477.50 equivalent to INR 21,33,175.80 towards financial assistance to the son of the petitioner under Jagananna Videshi Vidhya Deevana Scheme forthwith pending disposal of the present^{WritPetition.}

¶17

lA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to pay the entire^{amountsuchasthe} balance tuition fees and visa charges, flight fare (variable) and difference in exchange losses forthwith as admissible under GOMs.No.39, dt. 11-072022.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A RAJENDRA BABU

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶21

The Court made the following order:

¶22

€4

¶23

APHC010091372025

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶25

[3331]

¶26

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶27

TUESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶28

PRESENT

¶29

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶30

WRIT PETITION NO: 4966/2025

¶31

Between:

¶32

Chinna Kandukuri James Prasanth Kumar

¶33

...PETITIONER

¶34

AND

¶35

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶36

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶37

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶38

1.ARAJENDRA BABU

¶39

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶40

GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶41

The Court made the following order:

¶42

Heard Sri A. Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Swapna Priya, learned Assistant Government Pleader^{forSocialWelfare,for} respondents 1 and 2. 2. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the balance three installments to a tune of Rs.21,33,175.80 paise (£19,477.50), towards financial assistance to the petitioner’s son, as sanctioned by the respondents under Overseas Education Financial Assistance Scheme (Jaganna Videshi Vidhya Deevana Scheme) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the scheme’), as illegal and arbitrary.

¶43

Page 2 of 5

¶44

W.P.No.4966 of A '

¶45

The Government of Andhra Pradesh launched a scheme vide G.O.Ms.No.39 Social Welfare (Edn) Department, dated 11.07.2022 (Ex.P1) to provide financial assistance to the students of the weaker sections to pursue higher education and to provide opportunities to the students to study in some of the world’s leading universities. The petitioner’s son completed a Bachelor of Architecture from the School of Architecture, Vijayawada and applied to the MA, PG (Applied Imagination) course at University of Arts, London, United i\» ,gdom for the academic year 2023-2024. In pursuance of the scheme, the petitioner’s son applied along with the admission letter received from the University of Arts, London, United Kingdom (Ex.P2) to respondent No.1 vide ID No.2023003-484, for providing financial assistance. b) The state-level selection committee constituted for the scheme's implementation, interviewed on 16.12.2023, selected the petitioner’s son per the scheme's guidelines, and recommended him for sanction of financial assistance. Respondent No.2 by Ex.P3 informed the petitioner’s^sonand to the UK decision making centre, FCDC, United Kingdom and the University of Arts, London, UK, that the petitioner’s son is eligible to get tuition fee component fully from the State Government or the actual fee payable, whichever is less for his course. Respondent No.1 released the first instalment. The petitioner’s son completed two units. Respondent No.1 failed to pay the second and third instalment of scholarship as per the schedule and the petitioner’s son sent an email to the respondents under Ex.P4 about the warning issued by the University vis-a-vis non-payment^{oftheinstalmentfee.}

¶46

c) The petitioner filed additional affidavit vide USR No.50392/2025 bringing to the Court’s notice that the petitioner’s son access was disabled on 17.07.2024 due to non-payment of the second and third installments and the petitioner’s son was deported to India, on 11.03.2025, in pursuance of order (UAL Immigration Compliance) passed by the university authority, on b4.03.2025.

¶47

/

¶48

SRS,J W.P.No.4966 of 2025

¶49

page 3 of 5

¶50

d) This court granted an interim order on 07.03.2025,^directingthe respondents to release an amount of Rs. 13,69,398/-^{towardsthesecondand} third instalments within three weeks from that date.

¶51

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the petitioner’s son was deported to India, unless the^{4^'^instalmentispaid,the} University will not allow the student to pursue the^{coursefurther.} In such an event, the entire exercise will become futile. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare, on instructions, would submit that with some delay, the^{feeforthesecondand} third instalments was released, and in fact, the amount was paid to the university. She would further submit that as per G.O.No.39,^{dated11.07.2022} the fourth instalment fee will be released after successful completion of the fourth/final semester and uploading the fourth/final^{semester marksheetinthe} concerned online portal. 6. Thus, as seen from the material available on record, there is no dispute regarding the petitioner’s son's selection by the committee, constituted to implement the scheme, to pursue higher studies in London. In fact, the petitioner pursued further studies at University of^the Arts, London. The student has sent emails to the authorities from time to time to release the second and third instalments, however, those two instalments were not ; i released as per the schedule, resulting in the disabling^{oftheaccessofthe} petitioner’s son on 17.04.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner’s son was deported to India on 11.03.2025.

¶52

In the normal circumstances, as rightly pointed out by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare, the^{fourthinstalmentwillbe} paid after completion of the fourth/final semester and uploading the mark sheet in the concerned online portal. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, since the second and third^{instalmentswerenot}

¶53

rage 4 of 5

¶54

W.P.No.4966 of 20/

¶55

paid as per the schedule, the access of the petitioner’s son was disabled, and later the student was deported to India, despite releasing^thesecond and third instalments, however with some delay.

¶56

Thus, having paid the fee for three instalments as per the scheme, the petitioners son, for no fault on his part, is unable to pursue the course further. The very laudable object in promulgating the scheme vide G.O.No.39 dated 11.07.2022 has been frustrated vis-a-vis the petitioner’s son's further studies. Now the student was deported to India before completion^ofthe course.

¶57

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by the end of May, 2025, the student has to confirm with the university authorities regarding payment (i.e. fourth instalment) and, if the amount is not paid, the student has to take a fresh admission.

¶58

Given the above unique facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, directing the respondents to release the amount for fourth installment as per the entitlement of the petitioner s son to prosecute and complete the aforementioned course, within two weeks from today enabling the student to complete the course. No costs.

¶59

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶60

Sd/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTAM’LREGISTRAR //TRUECOPY//

¶61

SECi^ OFFICER

¶62

To

¶63