APHC010163622023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 8412/2023 Between: 1. I SAMBASIVA RAO, S/O.LATE I.RENUKAIAH, AGE 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.2-5, VIJAYAWADA ROAD, NEAR POST OFFICE, VYKUNTAPURAM VILLAGE AND POST, AMARAVATI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. 2. I. SESHU KUMARI, W/O.LATE I.RENUKAIAH, AGE 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.2-5, VIJAYAWADA ROAD, NEAR POST OFFICE, VYKUNTAPURAM VILLAGE AND POST, AMARAVATI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AGRICULTURE AND CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, HAVING OFFICE AT OLD MIRCHI YARD, NALLAPADU ROAD, CHUTTAGUNTA, GUNTUR - 522 004 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALNADU DISTRICT, NARASARAOPETA, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER CUM CHAIRMAN, DIVISIONAL LEVEL COMMITTEE, SATTENAPALLI REVENUE DIVISION, PALNADU DISTRICT 2 5. THE TAHSILDAR CUM CHAIRMAN, MANDAL LEVEL COMMITTEE AMARAVATHI MANDAL, AMARAVATHI, PALNADU DISTRICT 6. THE VILLAGE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER CUM CONVENOR, VYKUNTAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT 7. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMARAVATI POLICE STATION, AMARAVATHI, PALNADU DISTRICT 8. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, VYKUNTAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT 9. AMARANENI VENKATA KRISHNA, S/O.APPA RAO, AGE 30 YEARS, WORKING AS VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, VYKUNTAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, RESIDING AT LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, PALNADU 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 order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not granting financial assistance to the petitioners, in connection with the suicidal death of their family head I.Renukaiah, a tenant farmer, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.102 Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department dated 14.10.2019 as being illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondent to release the financial assistance to the petitioners, for the suicidal death of their family head, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.102 Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department dated 14.10.2019 read with G.O.Ms.No.43 Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department dated 20.02.2020 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MEKA RAHUL CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR AGRICULTURE 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 8412 of 2023 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “....to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not granting financial assistance to the petitioners, in connection with the suicidal death of their family head I.Renukaiah, a tenant farmer, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.102 Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department dated 14.10.2019 as being illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondent to release the financial assistance to the petitioners, for the suicidal death of their family head, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.102 Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department dated 14.10.2019 read with G.O.Ms.No.43 Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department dated 20.02.2020..” 2. Heard Sri Meka Rahul Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. M. Sandhya Deepthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture. Ms. Kotharu Vijayeswari, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue is in attendance. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the respondent- authorities are not granting financial assistance to the petitioners in connection with the suicidal death of the father of petitioner No.1, who is also the husband of petitioner No.2. Learned counsel would further submit that the deceased was a tenant farmer and committed suicide by consuming pesticide. He would further submit that a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents 4 stating that the District-Level Three-Member Committee is required to recommend the release of financial assistance of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs only) to the family members of the deceased victim, and thereafter the proposal is to be forwarded to the Commissioner of Agriculture through the District Collector. Learned counsel would further submit that the authorities had initially verified the matter and found it to be a genuine case. However, contrary to the earlier report, the respondents have relied upon an undated report in the counter affidavit to deny the claim of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that a fresh enquiry may be conducted to ascertain whether the father of petitioner No.1 was a tenant farmer, particularly in view of the dispute regarding his death by consuming pesticide. Learned counsel finally submits that an Advocate Commissioner may be appointed in this matter, in whose presence the enquiry may be conducted, and if the claim of the petitioners is found to be genuine, a direction may be given to the respondent-authorities to settle the claim within a stipulated time frame. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture would submit that, although the death of the father of the 1st petitioner was suicidal in nature, he was not a tenant farmer as claimed by the petitioners. She would further submit that the alleged owner of the land, namely, one Madala Srinivasa Rao, is possessed of only Ac.0.94 cents of land and, therefore, could not have leased out four acres of land to the deceased. The Three- Member Committee enquired into the matter and found that the claim was not 5 genuine and that the petitioners are not entitled to financial assistance. However, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture would submit that they have no objection to conduct a fresh enquiry by the Mandal- Level Committee in the presence of an Advocate Commissioner in this matter. 5. In the light of the aforesaid submissions, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is apposite to dispose of the present petition by appointing an Advocate Commissioner, with the consent of both parties, namely, Sri Ramesh Babu Tatapudi (Enrollment No.22819), for the purpose of conducting a fresh enquiry to ascertain as to whether the deceased was a tenant farmer or not. The said enquiry shall be conducted by the Mandal-Level Committee, comprising the concerned Station House Officer, Tahsildar, and Agricultural Officer, in the presence of the Advocate Commissioner on 23.06.2026 at 02:00 p.m. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to pay fees of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) to the Advocate Commissioner. The Advocate Commissioner shall submit his report to the concerned authorities forthwith. Upon receipt of the report of the Mandal Level Committee, the respondent-authorities are directed to examine genuineness of the claim and take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter. 7. With the above said observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 6 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 16.06.2026. UPS 7 120 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 8412 of 2023 Dt.16.06.2026 UPS