Telangana High Court
WP/22349/2023 of Manchala Shiva Raj Vs The State of Telangana, on 29 December 2023
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: 22349 OF 2023 Between: Manchala Shiva Raj, S/o Narsimlu, aged about 32
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKAWRIT PETITION NO: 22349 OF 2023
Between:
Manchala Shiva Raj, S/o Narsimlu, aged about 32 [years, ]Occ. CenteringWorker, Rl/o H.No. 5-4218, Chelivendram Palli, Chowdarygudem Mandal,Ranga Reddy District.
...PETITIONER
AND
1The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, SC DevelopmentDepartment, Secretariat, Hyderabad.Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2The Commissioner, Telangana Schedule Caste Development, Hyderabad,Hyderabad District.Hyderabad District.
The District Collector, Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy District.
J
4The Executive Director, Schedule Caste Development, Ranga Reddy [District,]Ranga Reddy.Ranga Reddy.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of [lndia praying ][that ][in ][the]circumstances stated in the affidavit [filed ][therewith, ][the ][H(7h ][Court may ][be]pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more [particularly ]one inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring [the action of ttre respondent No.3 ][and]4 in non considering the representation of [the ][petitioner ][and ][non ][initiating ][to]grant Dalita Bandu Scheme to the Petitioner basing on his application [is ][illegal]and arbitrary and violation of [Arlicles 14, ][15 ][and ][21 ][of ][the ][constitution ][of ][lndia]and also violation of Principles of [Natural ][Justice ][and ][consequently ][direct ][the]Respondent No. 3 to [grant ]the [Dalita Bandhu scheme ][to ][the ][Petitioner ][without]any recommendation of concerned [MLA ][and ][by considering ][his ][application ][and]by following the rules and regulations [of ][Dalita ][Bandhu ][scheme.]
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
Petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in suppo( of the petition, the High court may be pleased todirect the Respondent No. 3 to grant the Dalita Bandhu scheme to the petitionerdirect the Respondent No. 3 to grant the Dalita Bandhu scheme to the petitionerwithout any recommendation of concerned MLA and by considering hisapplication and by following the rules and regulations of Dalita Bandhu scheme,application and by following the rules and regulations of Dalita Bandhu scheme,pending disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.1, 2 & 4: Gp FOR SOCIAL WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: Gp FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKAWRIT PETITION No.22349 OF 2023
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The petitioner approached this Court seeking the relief as under:
"To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction moreparticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamusdeclaring the action of the respondent No.3 and 4 in nonconsidering the representation of the [petitioner ]and [non]initiating to grant Dalita Bandu Scheme to the Petitionerbasing on his application is illegal and arbitrarY andviolation of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution ofIndia and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice andconsequently direct the Respondent No.3 to [grant ][the]Dalita Bandhu scheme to the Petitioner withaut anYrecommendation of concerned MLA and by considering [his]application and by following the rules and [regulations ][of]Dalita Bandhu scheme and [pass ]such other order [or ]ordersas this Hon'ble Court deems fit and [proper ]in [the]circumstances of the case."
2. Heard learned counsel for the [petitioner ]and [learned]Government Pleader for [Revenue.]
3. Making the submission with regard to the [merits ][of ][the]matter, learned counsel for the [petitioner states ][that ][the]petitioner is a member of Scheduled Caste and is [an]unemployee. The [petitioner ][worked ][as ][a ][mastry ][and ][got ][the ][skill]in maintaining of works to [perform ]fitting [of ][centering ][to lay ][the]roof or concrete to construct a building. [Due ][to ][non ][-availability]
of required amount to start a business, he could not establishthe business. Therefore, he applied to the Government forGrant-of-Aid under Dalita Bandu Scheme so that he can start hisown business. However, his request was neither considered norrejected and therefore, he is before this Court.
4. In reply to the said submission, learned GovernmentPleader for Revenue submits that the scheme i.e., Dalita Banduis extended to all the eligible persons phase wise basing on therecommendations of the Committee constituted for the saidpurpose and hence, the petitioner's representation would soonbe considered.
5. There is no denial of the fact that the petitioner made hisrepresentation for Grant-of-Aid under 'Dalita Bandu Scheme' onlL.tl.2022. Thus, it is clear that the request of the petitioner forGrant-of-Aid is pending before the 3rd respondent i.e., TheDistrict Collector, Ranga Reddy, who is the competent authority,for more than one year. This Court is of the view that in thenormal course, such delay cannot be expected. Also, when theGovernment intends to extend financial benefit to the deserved,it can be extended though ph,ase-wise but within a fixed period.The Government cannot keep the representations or ,- ['\ations]
pending for years together, that too, without any sufficient [or]reasonable excuse. Therefore, this [Court ][considers desirable ][to]direct the respondent [No.3 ]to [consider ][the ][representation ][of ][the]petitioner time bound and to pass orders as [provided ]under [the]Rules and Regulations [framed ][there ][under.]
To,
6. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed [of ][with the ][following]d irection : [-]
Respondent No.3 i.e., [The ][District ][Collector, ][Ranga]
Reddy District, is directed to [consider ][the]representation of the [petitioner dated ][11.LL.2022]for extension of benefit under [" ][Dalita ][Bandu]Scheme" and release [the Grant-in-Aid, in ][case, ][the]petitioner is found eligible under the said [scheme,]within a period of eight [(B) ][weeks ][from the date ][of]receipt of a copy of this [order. The ][decision ][taken]shall be communicated to the [petitioner in ][writing.]
There shall be no order as to [costs.]
Miscellaneous [petitions, ]if [any, ][pending ][in ][this]Writ tSD/.MOHD.ISMAILASSISTANTts Petition, shall stand [closed.]
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
1. The Principal Secretary, SC [Development Department, ][Secretariat']Hyderabad, State of Telangana.Hyderabad, State of Telangana.
2. The Commissioner, [Telangana Schedule ][Caste ][Development, ][Hyderabad,]Hyderabad District.Hyderabad District.
3. The District Collector, [Ranga ][Reddy, ][Ranga ][Reddy ][District']
4- The Executive Director, Schedule caste Development, Ranga Reddy District,Ranga Reddy.Ranga Reddy.
5. One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate tOpUCl
6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana atHyderabad [OUTIHyderabad [OUTI
7. Two CCs to GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE, High Court for the State ofTelangana at Hyderabad [OUlBTwo CD CopiesBSRGJP$/-- tl li HIGH COURT
DATED: 2911212023
ORDERWP.No.22349 of 2023
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,WITHOUT COSTS
g ST.AT4::o2 2 [JAll ][?[2{]otIoEorr,'iir>::-;- ,