Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
A.Ananthagiri S/O Sriramulu vs The Government Of India on 19 November, 2021
Author: U.Durga Prasad Rao
Bench: U.Durga Prasad Rao
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO
WRIT PETITION No.28889 of 2013
ORDER:
The petitioner seeks writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in failing to release the annual grant-in-aid for the petitioner's institution for the academic years 2003-2004 to 2007 i.e., for a period of four years for running the girls hostel under the Central Integrated Rural Development Scheme as illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and for a consequential direction to the respondents.
2. The petitioner's case succinctly is thus:
(a) The petitioner is the Chairman of the Gramabhyudaya Society for Integrated Rural Development situated in 6th ward, Kota Street, Uravakonda, Anantapur District. It is a registered society and running a girl's hostel from 2002-2003 onwards by taking the premises on lease situated at D.No.20/646, Hanumesh Nagar, Guntakal, Anantapur District. Initially, there were about 100 students in the hostel having boarding and lodging facility for the classes 6 to 10 and the students have been studying in different schools. Hostel building which was taken by the petitioner is sufficient for dining and having other facilities for 100 boarders and rooms having cots and beds etc.
(b) The Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources Development, introduced the scheme for the structuring of boarding and hostel facilities for girls students of Secondary and Higher 2 Secondary Schools. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner submitted his proposals for starting the organization running hostel for girls in Guntakal. In response to his proposal, the then District Collector directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to inspect the hostel and submit report. Accordingly, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur, submitted report stating that the petitioner society is having all the required facilities, a copy of the report is filed herewith.
(c) Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued a sanction letter dated 29.03.2003 conveying the sanction to the petitioner society to a tune of ₹6,40,000/- as a first instalment for the year 2002-2003. Further, the respondent vide letter dated 03.11.2006 sanctioned an amount of ₹3,22,000/- as a second instalment for recurring grant for the year 2002-2003 to the petitioner society. As per the audited statement of expenditure, the petitioner incurred an expenditure of ₹9,72,810/- on 74 girl-boarders during the year 2002-2003.
(d) While so, the 5th respondent, who is the District Collector, Anantapur, in his proceedings dated 30.05.2007, addressed to Additional Secretary to Government, Education (SE-PROG-I) Department, Hyderabad, stating that petitioner society submitted proposals that the organization is running the hostel for girls at Guntakal and facing troubles in view of non-release of funds from the Government for the year 2003-2004 and requested to inspect the same and submit the proposals to the Government for grant-in-aid. In response, the Principal Secretary, vide letter dated 16.08.2007 3 instructed the District Educational Officer, Anantapur, to conduct enquiry and to submit detailed report. Accordingly, the DEO submitted enquiry report dated 24.06.2008 stating that the petitioner's organization is running girls hostel in a rented building and that he has verified the records and satisfied with the maintenance of the records and hostel provides good accommodation and quality of food to the girl boarders. In pursuance thereof, the 5th respondent has recommended the proposals for consideration vide letter Rc.No.H3/127/2008, dated 03.07.2008. Subsequently, several remainders were sent to the Central Government for release of the grant-in-aid for a period of four years from 2002 to 2007, however, respondents 1 and 2 did not release the funds. The petitioner society sent several representations but of no use.
Hence, the writ petition.
3. Respondents have not filed any counter. As it an old matter of the year 2013, this Court has taken up the matter and heard arguments of learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Y.Ashok Raj and learned Government Pleader for Education.
4. A perusal of the proceedings No.F.17-69/2002-Sch.1, Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, School - 1 Section, dated 03.11.2006, shows that on the basis of statement of accounts furnished by the petitioner's agency for the year 2002-2003, the respondents 1 and 2 having found that the petitioner institution has 4 incurred an expenditure of ₹9,72,810/- for the financial year 2002- 2003, approved the said amount stating that the payment of the amount will be made by the Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Grant- in-aid, Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of Secondary and Higher Education, New Delhi, after the bill has been presented to the Accounts Officer, Pay and Accounts Officer (Education), New Delhi, to the party concerned. Further, the letter in Rc.No.H3/3200/2007, dated 30.05.2007, submitted by the 5th respondent to the Additional Secretary to Government, Education (SE-PROG-I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, would show that on verification by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur, it was found that the petitioner society is running a hostel for girls in Guntakal for the last four years in a rented building with all the facilities. Therefore, a detailed report together with specific recommendation in a proforma was communicated in the reference first cited and the same is sent along with the letter of the Collector with a request that the proposals of the society may be considered for release of grant-in-aid. Similar letter was addressed by the successor of the District Collector, Anantapur, vide his letter dated 03.07.2008. However, the grant seems to have not been paid so far as no material has been placed by the respondents of having paid the expenditure as incurred by the petitioner for the relevant years.
5. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider payment of the annual grant-in-aid 5 to the petitioners from the year 2003-2004 to 2006-2007 expeditiously but not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 19.11.2021 Note: issue C.C. by 22.11.2021.
B/o.SS