S SUBRAMANYAM vs THE STATE OF AP

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO.13432 of 2023 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed declaring the action of Respondent No.5 in not releasing the amount of Rs.2.50 lakhs to the Petitioner as illegal and arbitrary.

2.

Petitioner had worked as SGT (Secondary Grade Teacher) at MPUP School, Nadigadda, Sodam Mandal from 2012 and had retired in the same school on 31.01.2021.

It was submitted that while the Petitioner was in-charge Headmaster of the said School, the Government had decided to better the facilities and also attend to building repairs under Naadu Nedu scheme issued under G.O.Ms.No.87, School Education (PROG.II) Department, dated 30.11.2019 and G.O.Ms.No.22, School Education (PROG.II) Department, dated 06.05.2020 and kept the Headmasters in-charge for superintendence.

3.

An amount of Rs.42 lakhs was sanctioned towards the school in which the Petitioner was working phase wise.

Initially, an amount of Rs.24 lakhs was spent and the amount was released.

The Petitioner had incurred additional expenditure of Rs.8.74 lakhs and bills were submitted.

Out of the expenditure of Rs.8.74 lakhs, an amount of 2 Rs.2.50 lakhs has been deposited in the IOB account and the said amount is not being released.

Though the Petitioner had represented to the authorities concerned for release of the amounts, as the same is not being considered, the present writ petition is filed.

4.

Counter affidavit was filed by Respondent No.5, wherein it is stated that after filing of the writ petition, the claim of the Petitioner was placed before the School Management Committee on 02.04.2023 and a resolution was passed for release of amounts provided, the Petitioner submits relevant vouchers, expenditure statements, bills, invoices etc.

It is stated that the amounts could not be released as the Petitioner instead of furnishing the relevant vouchers and bills, had filed the writ petition.

5.

Heard Sri T.V.S.

Sri T.V.S.Kumarl, learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Education.

6.

The stand of the Respondents that they will release the amounts subject to furnishing of expenditure statement, vouchers, bills, invoices etc., cannot be said to be unreasonable.

7.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the Petitioner to furnish the relevant documents to the Respondents to 3 enable to release the appropriate amounts.

There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 27.04.2026 KLP