High Court · 2025

ofRs'50,000/-undertheAapathbandhuSchemetothePetitioner,pendingdisposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. RAPOLU BHASKAR counsel for the Respondent Nos'1 to 4: SRI L' RAVINd;R GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No'5: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER : !-rr .\ HOI{'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BIIASI{AR REDDY WRIT PETITTON NO.7377 o{iors ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed praying this Court to declare the action of respondent No.3 in not considering the online application No.APB02 I 900050540, dated 04.0 1.20 19 submitted by the petitioner seeking for release of financial aid amount of Rs.50,000/- under the Apathbandu Scheme for the death of her son by name Kandr'rla Ajay Kumar, who died due to elec(r'ical shock, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the Article s 14, 27 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently, prayed for other aPProPriate reliefs.

2. It is stated that the petiLioner belongs to Scheduled Caste Community and working as an agricultural labourer to eke out her livelihood. It is further stated thdt the petitioner's major son by name Kandula Ajay Kumar, who worked as agricultural labourer, died due to electrical shock on 29 'O8.2OLa and basing on the complaint lodged, a case in Crime No.16 of 2018 was registered for the offence under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. and the same is pending for investigation. Therefore, the petitioner has submitted online application, dated O4-OL-2O19, seeking for release of financial aid amount of Rs-50,O00/- under the ., \ CVBR J Wp "7377 _2025 Apattrbandu scheme. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after receipt of the said application, the respondent authorities did not consider the same.

3. Considered the submissions of the leamed counsel for the respective parties and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the State Government has introduced a policy commonly loeown as Apathbandhu', wherein, if any person belonging to below povert5r line or SC/ ST communit5r expired due to electrical shock or other accidental death, ex-gratia of Rs.50,O00/, is to be paid to the deceased family. Learned counsel further submits that even though the petitioner fulfrlled all the requirements and entitled for ex gratia of Rs.SO,OOO / -, the respondent authorities did not pay the said ex gratia 4mount.

5. Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistarrt Government pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, does not diipute the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that an amount of Rs.50,O00/- towards ex gratia has to be paid if a 1'v'l: '.'. I I \ \ 3 d CVBR, J 7317 2025 Wp. person dies due to electrical shock as peri6'O'Ms'No' 1' dated

25.05.2018.

6. Be that as it may, as per guideline No'7 of G'O'Ms No'1' dated.25.05.2018, an ex gratia of Rs'5O,000/- has to be paid in respect of the 'Deaths on account of electrocution'' A reading of the complaint, dated 29-O8.2OI8 would revea-l that the petitioner's son got electrical shock on 29 'O8'2O18 while he was adjusting the current motor to the water tap at his house.and thereafter, he was shifted to the Government Hospital' Husnabad, where the doctor declared that he was already dead' Hma facie, the verification of records would reveal that the petitioner's son, who was aged about 29 years and was assisting the family to eke out their livelihood, died due to electrical shock. In view of the above submissions and since the petitioner 7 . has made online application seeking for release of financial aid of Rs.50,00O/- towards ex gratia amount for the death of her son, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition, directing respondent Nos'2 and, 3 to examine application No.APBO2190OO5O54O, dated 04'01'2O19 and if the petitioner fi:Iflls all the requirements and is otherrvise entitled' 4 \. C\TBR, J Wp '1377 _2025 t- 1i release the financia-l aid of Rs.50,OO0g'towards ex gratia amount for the death of her son, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

9. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. \ To, //TRUE COPYII SD/.K. SREE RAMA MU DEPUTY REGI Y AR SECTION FFICER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Secretary, C M.Relief Funds, Telangana, Hyderabad. The District Collector, Siddipet, Siddipet District. The Tahsrldar. Akkannapeta Mandal, Siddipet District. The Station House Officer, Akkanapeta Police Station, Siddipet District. One CC to SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies o KKS BS g I '1 t { i )' '- q

1.ir.:'-'+'r i{:, { t-.,._".r r ., "' .',i ,' ?; - J,1 ,'i,,11 .'l{ ,t I ,| 1 i I 1 I I I $. #$j l .,, I i ri.,t J "..,.1 1.T I ,J 1 t I I 1 I J I II I t i t l 1 i,t 'ts + -, . ',lj -+. . ,\;. , :.:i. l' '-<,,. l-i . r i' 1 rr#,r a1 #D JT HIGH COURT DATED:1 110312025 ORDER WP.No.7377 ot 2025 ( c J o t SIrrl6- ? z o .brt .t 01 lPfl 2[25 J OESltATC 6(o DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @F' W