← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/18886/2010disposed of no costs

Kum. Nityapriya, v. Social Welf. Dept., Rep. By Its Sec. And 4 ORS.,

2017-11-30Ramesh Ranganathan2 pages

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO.18886 OF 2010 ORDER:

The deponent of the writ affidavit claims to have adopted the petitioner in October, 2006. The child appears to have participated in the admission test conducted under the "Bright Boys Scheme" on 20.12.2009, to have passed the entrance examination, and to have secured admission in the fifth respondent-School in the 1st Class. On sanction of scholarship being sought, the Tahsildar is said to have issued a certificate. The third respondent is said to have called upon the deponent asking him to seek cancellation of the admission of his daughter, on the ground that she was not keeping good health. The deponent claims to have given a letter under coercion, and to have later submitted a letter to the school requesting them to ignore his earlier letter.

The petitioner's grievance is that the third respondent is not inclined to forward her application, for grant of scholarship, to the second respondent. By the interim order in WPMP.No.23896 of 2010 dated 03.08.2010, the respondents were directed not to cancel the petitioner's admission. Smt. B.Manjulatha Vedavalli, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner is still continuing to study in the fifth respondent-school. As the issue relates to payment of scholarship, the question whether or not the child is eligible for scholarship is for the second respondent to consider. Suffice it to dispose of the Writ Petition permitting the deponent of the writ affidavit to make an application, on behalf of the petitioner, to the second respondent seeking grant of scholarship.

made, the second respondent shall consider the request in accordance with law, and pass orders thereupon within three months from the date of receipt of the said representation. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

_________________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, ACJ) 30th November 2017 RRB