Allowed

Saranya .G v. The Director

Madras HC19 Dec 2024WP(MD)/2045/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the rejection of the petitioner's claim for financial assistance under the Dr. Ambedkar Social Integration Scheme for an inter caste marriage. The High Court held the rejection unsustainable due to official delay and directed disbursement of the grant.

What did the court decide?

Writ allowed; quashed the rejection order; directed the first respondent to disburse Rs. 2,50,000/- to the petitioner within four weeks.

Saranya .G Vs The Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P (MD).No.2045 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 19.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

W.P (MD).No.2045 of 2023

G.Saranya

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Director,

¶11

Dr.Ambedkar Foundation, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Government of India,

¶12

K.G.Marg, Jeevan Prakash Building,

¶13

New Delhi-110 001.

¶14

2.The District Collector, Collectorate, Theni.

¶15

3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Madurai.

¶16

4.The Director, Department of Welfare of Schedule Caste, Collectorate, Madurai. ...Respondents

¶17

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records regarding the rejection order of first respondent dated 18.12.2022 and quash the same consequently direct the first respondent to disburse the financial assistance to the petitioner under the Dr.Ambedkar Social Integration Scheme.

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

1/5

¶20

W.P (MD).No.2045 of 2023

¶21

For Petitioner	: Mr.M.Ramu
For R1	: Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkatachalapathy Senior Panel Counsel for
For R2 to R4	: Mr.D.Gandhi Raj
	Special Government Pleader

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the

¶24

first respondent, dated 18.12.2022, thereby, rejected the claim made by the petitioner for financial assistance under the Dr.Ambedkar Social Integration Scheme for their inter caste marriage.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶26

The petitioner belongs to Pallar community and her husband

¶27

belongs to Padmasaliyar community. They got married as per the Hindu Rituals on 09.06.2016. Their marriage was duly registered vide registration No.77/2016 on the file of the Registrar, Madurai. While being so, the Ministry of Social justice and Empowerment implemented the Scheme under the Dr.Ambedkar Social Integration Scheme. Accordingly, the Financial Assistance will be provided to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- for the inter caste marriage. In order to apply under the scheme, the eligibility criteria is that

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

2/5

¶30

W.P (MD).No.2045 of 2023

¶31

proposal would be treated as valid if submitted within one year of marriage. However, the request made by the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the application has not been submitted within a period of one year from the marriage, thus, failed to meet the eligibility criteria and rejected the application of the petitioner by the first respondent.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that she got married her husband on 09.06.2016 and the same was registered vide registration No.77/2016. Immediately, the petitioner and her husband submitted an application before the fourth respondent on 21.02.2017 itself enclosing all the required documents, however, there was a delay in forwarding the same to the first respondent. Therefore, the delay occurred not on the fault of the petitioner. There was an internal delay between the fourth respondent and the first respondent. Therefore, the delay cannot be fastened on the petitioner. Insofar as the other eligibility criteria is concerned, the petitioner and her husband are entitled for financial assistance under the Dr.Ambedkar Scheme.

¶33

In view of the above, the order of the first respondent cannot be sustained and it is liable to be quashed. The first respondent is directed to disburse the financial assistance to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- to the petitioner as

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

3/5

¶36

W.P (MD).No.2045 of 2023

¶37

incentive under the Dr.Ambedkar Social Integration Scheme within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶38

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.

¶39

Internet : Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order am

¶40

19.12.2024

¶41

¶42

1.The Director, Dr.Ambedkar Foundation, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Government of India, K.G.Marg, Jeevan Prakash Building, New Delhi-110 001.

¶43

2.The District Collector, Collectorate, Theni.

¶44

3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Madurai.

¶45

4.The Director, Department of Welfare of Schedule Caste, Collectorate, Madurai.

¶46

4/5

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

W.P (MD).No.2045 of 2023

¶49

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

¶50

¶51

W.P (MD).No.2045 of 2023

¶52

19.12.2024

¶53

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶54

5/5

Saranya .G v. The Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saranya .G v. The Director

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

Muthaiah Vs the District Collector

Malarvizhi.a Vs the District Collector

Seenivasan K Vs The District Registrar (Administration)

Sugumar.G Vs the Assistant Director

Kesavaraj.S Vs the Asst.Director

Sulaika Beevi Vs The Sub-Registrar