1 APHC010224942022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 13381 OF 2022 Between: 1. Pynam Surendra Kumar,, S/o Pitchaiah, .Aged about 49 years, R/o 51-1- 28, Community Hall Road, Kabadi Palem, Ongole, Prakasam District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Dept, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. Andhra Pradesh Schedule Castes Cooperative Finance Corporation LTD, Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Tadepalli, Guntur District. 3. The Executive Director, DSCSC Ltd, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4. District Schedule Castes Cooperative Society, Rep by its Secretary, Ongole, Prakasam District. 5. The District Collector and Chairman, District Schedule Castes Cooperative Society, Ongole, Prakasam District. ...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 topleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the action the respondents in not 2 releasing the Innova (Transport Vehicle) under self employment scheme under SCAP 2018-2019, pursuant to the proceedings No. NSFDC/2068/8/APSC/2018, Dt-09-03-2019 of the 2nd respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of Natural justice and non application of mind and Arts 14,19(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to release the Innova ( Transport Vehicle) under self employment scheme under SCAP 2018-2019, pursuant to the proceedings No. NSFDC/2068/8/APSC/2018, Dt-09-03-2019 of the 2nd respondent forthwith to enable petitioner to eke out petitioner livelihood and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representations Dt:26-08- 2019 and Dt:29-12.-2021 qua release the Innova (Transport Vehicle) under self employment scheme under SCAP 2018-2019, pursuant to the proceedings No. NSFDC/2068/8/APSC/2018, Dt: 09-03-2019 of the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 May be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner/Respondent no. 2 AND 3 to file Counter affidavit, in W.P. No. 13381 of 2022 in the interest of Justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: T V JAGGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: CHINTA CHINA SATYANARAYANA ( SC FOR APSCCFC) Counsel for the Respondents:GANDRALA RATHNA KUMAR SC For APSCCFC LTD Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondents:P SATYANARAYANA 3 The Court made the following order: The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on part of the respondent- Corporation in releasing Innova (Transport Vehicle) under the Self- Employment Scheme under SCAP 2018-2019, pursuant to the proceedings dated 09.03.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner is seeking a direction from this Court to the respondents to release the said vehicle, which the petitioner would be using for eking out his livelihood. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has applied for sanction of a transport vehicle for the purpose of eking out his livelihood. It is submitted that the petitioner was shortlisted along with others under the scheme and the petitioner was required to submit the documents as required for release of the vehicle. It is further submitted that, though adequate funds were allotted by the government, the 2nd respondent has so far not released the vehicle. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner would have to contribute Rs.34,000/- after release of the vehicle, a subsidy of Rs.6,00,000/- is to be deposited by the 2nd respondent with the dealer and a loan of Rs.10,81,000/- disbursed by the National Scheduled Castes Finance and Development Corporation is to be paid to the dealer of the car. It is further submitted that, though the petitioner approached respondent authority with regard to the said vehicle, the vehicle was not delivered to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said action, the present Writ Petition is filed. 4 4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 5 submits that a detailed counter is filed and that the petitioner failed to submit the necessary documents within the stipulated time, i.e., by 06.01.2020. It is also submitted that the 2nd respondent had approved 47 beneficiaries for handing over 12 Innova cars, 21 Etios cars, 7 tractor-cum- trailer units and 7 power autos to the District and the petitioner did not submit the documentation and pay the beneficiary contribution to the office within the stipulated time. As such, the petitioner was not entitled to the said benefit. 5. It is also submitted that the beneficiaries would have to deposit their contribution as all the amounts would have to be paid to the credit of the dealer for releasing the vehicle. Having failed to deposit his contribution, the petitioner cannot claim any relief this Court. 6. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have delivered Etios car to one K. Sujan Kumar in the month of February, 2022 and the said vehicle was handed over to the beneficiary in the month of February, 2022. It is submitted that K. Sujan Kumar was one of the beneficiary along with the petitioner. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 8. The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to handover the Innova vehicle under the beneficial scheme introduced for the upliftment of the Scheduled Castes unemployed youth. The beneficiaries 5 would have to comply with the requirements for delivery of the vehicle and the requirements with regard to contributing the amounts from the beneficiary side to the dealer. 9. As seen from the pleadings, the petitioner has stated that the beneficiary contribution will be paid after release of the vehicle by Corporation. The proceedings dated 09.03.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent disclose the details with regard to the number of vehicles sanctioned, cost of the vehicles, subsidy issued by the Corporation, loan issued by the NSFDC and beneficiary contribution for release of a vehicle from the dealer. 10. The dealer would have to receive the invoice amount of the said vehicle for its release. The beneficiary contribution, along with the subsidy and the loan amount, should be credited to the account of the dealer for release of the vehicle. The petitioner has stated that the beneficiary contribution shall be paid after release of the vehicle may not meet the requirements of the dealer for release of the vehicle. 11. It is evident that the petitioner could not submit the required documents and pay the beneficiary contribution before the stipulated deadline, no further orders can be passed. 12. Accordingly the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 30.09.2026 RJS/SZT 7 07 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 13381 OF 2022 Dt: 30.09.2026 RJS/SZT