IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.14350/2017 AND * WRIT PETITION Nos.18069 – 18279/2017 (EDN – RES) BETWEEN :
SRI.VISHWABHARATHI EDUCATION SOCIETY (REGD) MALLASANDRA, Dig VIJAYA RURAL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION (B.Ed), HADAVANAHALLI (NEAR AMMASANDRA CEMENT FACTORY) ADITHYA PATTANA, TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572211.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.JAGADEESHACHARI, ADVOCATE) AND :
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001.
3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GRADE-2 TALUK SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKUR – 572211. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIJAYAKUMAR A.PATIL, AGA) * Corrected vide chamber order dated 05.06.2017 THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE ANNEXURE-D DATED 10.01.2017; DIRECT RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE BALANCE AMOUNTS TO THE PETITIONER’S INSTITUTION OF RS.27,025/- TO EACH STUDENTS OF SC-ST WITH INTERESTS DELAYED PAYMENTS. ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to accept notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner is running a B.Ed course, recognized by the Government. The respondent No.1 by its Government order dated 22.07.2000 and 30.04.2009, issued orders and directions to all the District and Taluk Social Welfare Departments regarding payment of Rs.30,000/- for tuition fees, Rs.5,000/- for development fees and other Rs.2,150/- total amounting to Rs.37,150/- per student belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes students studying in B.Ed., course. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the directions issued by the respondent No.1 to all the District and Taluk Social Welfare department, the respondents have not paid the said amount to each of the private (unaided management) seats. Further, the several requests made by the petitioners remained unconsidered. Hence, these petitions.
3. It is significant to note that the question involved in these petitions was considered in writ petition Nos.10098-99/2017 (DD-8th March 2017) and this Court directed the Respondents/Authorities to consider the representations of the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders. The petitioner herein is entitled to similar relief. Hence, it is imperative for this Court to pass the similar order.
4. The respondents are directed to consider the representations of the petitioner at Annexure-‘D’ (Dated 10.01.2017) in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible.
The writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the above.
Sd/- JUDGE NC