ZILLA VIKALANGULA SANGAM Vs. GOVT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking a direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not releasing the grant-in-aid for the financial years 2000-01 and 2001-02. Latter, as a letter dated 28.07.2009 was issued stating the reasons for the non-release of the grant, WPMP.No.34532 of 2009 was filed seeking an amendment of the prayer so as to include the letter No.S-27021/47/98-CL, dated 28.07.2009 as illegal, arbitrary etc. WP.MP.No.34532 of 2009 is allowed.

(2.) This Court has heard Sri Prakash Buddarapu on behalf of Sri P.Giri Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the respondent.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the petitioner-society was registered in 1980 and that it is a Non-Government organization running four special schools for child labour. It is his contention that since 1999, the grant-in-aid is being given to the petitioner-society. The same continued till 2000-01 and thereafter in 2001-02, the grant was stopped. The petitioner has written many letters which are not answered. Documents are also relied upon showing the payment of the grant-in-aid initially. Lastly, on 08.12.2018, the respondent addressed a letter seeking certain information within 15 days. The same was purportedly sent in December, 2008 itself by the respondent as can be seen from the letter dated 11.12.2018. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thereafter on the basis of a purported case registered against D.Yedukondalu, who was the President of the petitioner-society, the grant was stopped. According to the learned counsel, the criminal case which is registered against D.Yedukondalu has got nothing to do with the present society which is headed by Smt. T.Saidamma. Learned counsel filed a copy of the charge sheet of the year 2005 and argued that the allegations in that case pertain to the said D.Yedukondalu only. He also relied upon Zilla Vikalangula Sangam vs. Government of India, 2008 1 ALT 180 and argued that even thereafter the respondent has blacklisted the petitioner society and the said order of back-listing was set aside in this case. Learned counsel therefore submits that a motivated action is being taken to deny the legitimate dues of the petitioner. He also submits that all the queries raised by the respondent have been answered and that there is no valid or tenable ground to deny the grant-in-aid.