Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/10938/2017 of Paidi Venkata Satyanarayana Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal on 5 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 10938/2017 Between: 1. PAIDI VENKATA SATYANARAYANA, S/O. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC
APHC010153432017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT PETITION NO: 10938/2017
Between:
1. PAIDI VENKATA SATYANARAYANA, S/O. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. KINTHALI VILLAGE, PONDURU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT , A.P.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL, SECRETARY, FINANCE
AND
PLANNING
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR
DISTRICT.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL, SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE
&
COOPERATION
(AG.II)
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS,
VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. A.P.
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF PANCHAYAT RAJ RD DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT A.P.
4. RYTHU
SADHIKARIKA
SAMSTHA
VETERINARY
COMPLEX,
GANNAVARAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. A.P. REP. BY ITS CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
5. THE CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA SRIKAKULAM ANDHRA PRADESH, DOOR NO.13-3-1/A, WOMENS COLLEGE ROAD, SRIKAKULAM, BRANCH CODE NO.03360. REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
6. THE TAHSILDAR PONDURU MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT,
...RESPONDENT(S):
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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of debt waiver scheme of Agricultural Crop Loans to the farmers in terms of the G.O.Ms.No. 181, dated 1-9-2014 and guide lines issued by the Government as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, and violation of principles of natural justice and apart from violation of Articles 14,16 and 21 of Constitution of India and contrary to the G.O.Ms.No. 181, dated 1-9-2014 and Guidelines and direct the respondents to extend the benefit to the petitioner’s debt waiver scheme of Agricultural Crop Loans to the farmers in terms of the G.O.Ms.No. 181, dated 1-9-2014 and Guidelines to the petitioner along with interest in the interest of justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 13582 OF 2017
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 direct the respondents to extend the bend" is the petitioner 's debt waiver scheme of Agricultural Crop Loans to the farmers in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.
181, dated 1-92014 and Guidelines to the petitioner ding with interest and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. P LAKSHMANA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COOPERATION (AP)
2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
3. CH SIVA REDDY
4. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP)
5. K MOHAN RAMI REDDY
6. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING
WRIT PETITION NO: 10938 of 2017
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:-
1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of the Agricultural Crop Loan Debt Waiver Scheme to the petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.181, dated 01.09.2014, and the guidelines issued thereunder, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the said Government Order and the guidelines, and consequently to direct the respondents to extend the benefit of the said scheme to the petitioner.
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri K. Mohan Rami Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.4, brought to the notice of this Court that, as per the Government Orders, the petitioner is entitled to an amount of Rs.21,341.86/-, which has already been received by the petitioner.
3. Sri P.Lakshmana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is entitled to Rs.1,50,000/- under the scheme. He fairly conceded that the petitioner has already received an amount of Rs.21,341.86/-.
4. At this juncture, learned counsel for respondent No.4 would submit that a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 28.03.2017, granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to respondent No.4, but the petitioner has not submitted any such representation.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Writ Petition may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to respondent No.4 and by directing the respondent authorities to take an appropriate decision thereon according to the governing Rules and Law.
6. Recording the above submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to submit a representation to respondent No.4 within a period of four (4) weeks from this day. On such representation being submitted, the respondent authorities shall consider the same and take an appropriate decision, in accordance with the governing Rules and law, as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs..
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 06.08.2026. UPS
WRIT PETITION NO: 10938 of 2017
Dt.06.08.2026
UPS