Kosuru Gurucharan Naidu(Student) Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

APHC010217172026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 11181 OF 2026

¶7

Between:

¶8

KOSURU GURUCHARAN NAIDU(STUDENT), Represented by his father and natural guardian Mr.K. Sitaramanj aneyulu, S/o. Satyanarayana, aged 61 years Occ Private Employee, R/o D.No. 4015/1-21/2, Annapurna Apartments, FF7 Brundavan Colony, Labbipet Vijayawada Urban, Venkateswara puram Post Krishna District - 520010

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government, EBC Welfare Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Pincode 522238.

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Pincode 522238.

¶13

The Managing Director, The A.P. State Kapu Welfare and Development Corporation Ltd., A Government of Andhra Pradesh

¶14

2

¶15

Undertaking 12-467, 3rd floor, Pothuri Mercantile NH - 16 Service Road, Tadepalli, Guntur District - 522501.

¶16

...Respondents

¶17

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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly 3rd Respondent in not releasing the Financial Assistance for studying abroad under Videshi Vidya Deevana Scheme for the year 2017-2018 to my son having been approved of his name for the said benefit by the State Level Screening Committee as highly illegal, opposed to the Policy Decision of the Government, Arbitrary exercise of power and also opposed to legitimate expectation and consequently direct the respondents to release the financial assistance under the said scheme forthwith to mitigate the hardship of the selected student and pass

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶19

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 pleased to direct the respondents to release the financial assistance to my son under Videshi Vidya Deevana Scheme forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: K KOUTILYA

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Chejarla Venkateswara Rao, Standing Counsel for AP State Kapu Welfare & Development Corporation.

¶23

The Court made the following order:

¶24

3

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶26

Writ Petition No: 11181 /2026

¶27

O R DE R:

¶28

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not releasing financial assistance of Rs.10,00,000/(Rupees Ten Lakhs only) sanctioned to the son of the Petitioner under ‘Videshi Vidhya Deevena’ scheme for pursuing Masters in New York Institute of Technology in United States of America as illegal and arbitrary .

¶29

2. The facts leading to this case are as follows:

¶30

The son of the Petitioner had applied for financial assistance under “Videshi Vidhya Deevana’ for pursuing Masters in New York Institute of Technology in United States of America, vide Application ID No.OV2017110775. After due verification, Respondent No.3 sanctioned Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) in favour of the son of the Petitioner for pursuing the said course. Though, the son of the Petitioner had completed his Course, the financial assistance as promised to the son of the Petitioner was not disbursed to him. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶31

Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following directions:-

¶32

(i) The Respondents are directed to examine the claim of the Petitioner within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

(ii) In the event, the claim of the Petitioner is held to be

¶34

4

¶35

in order, the Respondents are directed to release the amounts to the Petitioner within a further period of eight (08) weeks.

¶36

(iii) There shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed.

¶38

_______________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY