Padmavathi School of NuMhg SC, ST, BC Students, Association, Bakkannapalem, PM Patem v. The Union of India, Ministry of Social Welfare and Empowerment, Sastry Bhavan
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Smt. B.Udaya Welfare, Government of Andhra. Pradesh, 3rd Floor, Sankshema Bhavan, Masab iAS, Commissioner of Social Lakshmi, Hyderabad. -'VX: V. ...RESPONDENTS 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in issuing the speaking order in Prodgs. No.D2 /7716/2010, dated 17.08.2012 in rejecting to sanction scholarships to/the SC & 6 ST students/ members association petitioners bn .thp ground of G.O.Ms.No. 66 dated
08.09.2010 (which was issued not retrospectively), though they admitted in their courses in of Articles the month of August, 2010 as illegal, arbitrary, 16 and 21 violation of India and consequently direct the respondents to sanction the scholarships to the SC and ST students/members of the petitioner associations from the academic year 2010-2011 onwards. of the Constitution 14, LA. NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 35806 OF 7017) Petition under Section ISL^PC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court pleased to suspend the Prodgs. No.D2/7716/ 2010 issued by the 5th respondent by directing the respondents to scholarships to the SC and ST students/ associations from the academic members of the may be dated 17.08.2012 sanction the petitioner onwards, pending disposal of the writ petition. I.A. NO: 2 OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 51028 OF 9ni9) Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances in support of the petition, the High Court may be ^ / & pleased to direct the petitioner to delete respondent No.7 Smt. B. Udaya Lakshmi, IAS from the array of the respondent. I.A, NO: 2 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 11434 OF 2013) 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 to direct the respondents to release the postmatric scholarships to the members of the petitioners associations in pursuance of the clarification given in the Letter dated 25.02.2013 by the 1st respondent-Gover nment of India, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI D L PANDU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO (DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA) Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 to 6: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.7: — The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010426022012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3331] (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY .THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 28112/2012 Between: Padmavathi School Of Nursing Sc, St, Be Students and Others ...PETITIONER(S) The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) AND / I .? Counsel for the Petitloner(S):
1.D L PANDU Counsel for the Respondent(S);
1.GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE
ELEVATED AS JUDGE The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above writ petition is filed challenging the speaking order issued by respondent No.5 dated
17.08.2012, whereby rejecting sanction scholarships to SC & ST students, of G.O.Ms.No.66, dated
08.09.2010, is illegal and arbitrary.
2. The writ petition was admitted on 07.09.2012 and W.P.M.P.No.3580 6 of 2012 was dismissed. Sri D.L.Pandu, learned counsel for the petitioners would
efflux of time, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication submit that by
Given submission made by learned counsel for the Petition is closed. However, this order will not preclude the the benefits, if any, as per their eligibility. No order as to costs. petitioner, the Writ petitioners to avail Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this case, shall stand closed. To. //TRUE COPY// Sd/-N NAGAMMA assistant registrar SECTION OFFICER
1. One CC to Sri D L Pandu, Advocate [OPUC] ^ [OuVf 3. Two CCS to GP for General Soci^^Welfare Pradesh. [OUT] High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Administration, High Court of Andhra
4. One CC to Sri Pasala Ponna Advocate [OPUC]
Three CD Copies TF Rao (Deputy Solicitor General of India) \ -N \ / \ HIGH COURT DATED;t)7/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.28112of 2012 CLOSING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 17 Aug 2012. The bench was SUBBA REDDY SATTI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.