THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.11968 of 2009 Dated 25th November, 2011 Between: Ravinuthala Malleswari and others …Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep.by Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Kunareddy Anji Reddy Counsel for respondents: GP for Land Acquisition The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not sanctioning monetary relief, apart from distributing rice as was done in the case of 15 persons of Oppircherla Village as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri Kunareddy Anji Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondents. The petitioners belong to SC, ST and BC communities o f Oppicherla Village. A report was submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Guntur, along with the original copy of charge sheet in Crime No.55 of 2005 of Karempudi Police Station, which was ﬁled in the Court of the learned II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Gurazala in P.R.C.No.8 of 2006 under Section 3(1)(x) and (xiv) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’). It is shown in the charge sheet that 15 persons, shown as LWs.5 to 19, belonging to Hindu (Madiga) caste, were victimized due to the atrocities perpetrated in the Oppicherla Village. The State Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.3, Social Welfare (H) Department, dated 16.01.1996, providing for several reliefs to the victims of the atrocities belonging to SC, ST and BC communities. One such relief is the cash grant of Rs.50,000/- to each of the victims. The cash grant was made in favour of these 15 persons. The petitioners, who are not given this cash grant, ﬁled the present writ petition claiming the said relief, apart from the other reliefs, such as supply of rice. A counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled by respondent No.3, wherein it is inter alia stated that a Committee was constituted with the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Narasaraopet, the Deputy Director, Social Welfare and the SDPO, Gurazala to look into the grievances of the persons, who are not extended the reliefs and to examine whether the charge sheet requires any changes to include 277 persons, who are also allegedly the victims, that the said Committee visited Oppircheerla Village on 09.06.2006 and enquired with 352 persons belonging to SC, ST and BC community and 23 caste ryots about the alleged social boycott of the persons, that the enquiry revealed that 352 persons belonging to SC, ST and BC communities were not socially boycotted and that the Committee has accordingly opined that there is no need to extend monetary relief under the Act. It is further stated that in view of the repeated representations, the Deputy Director, Social Welfare, proposed a special package to the persons belonging to the scheduled castes of Oppicherla Village which is as under: “1. Housing under IAY, 2. House sites for houseless poor, 3. Land Development, 4. Land purchase scheme for eligible persons, 5. Infrastructure facilities to the SC Colony like water supply, roads, street lighting, 6. Ambedkar statue (Bronze) with Rs.One lakh from Commissioner, Social Welfare, and One lakh from mobilisation, 7. Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Narasaraopet to clear all legal hurdles and to handover their assigned lands, 8. Providing of free seats in Residential Schools and Social Welfare Hostels, and 9. Pensions to eligible persons.” That the Collector, Guntur issued proceedings bearing Rc.No.62/102/06, dated 19.09.2006, directing the Oﬃcers concerned to conduct survey in Oppircherla Village and prepare the budget estimates, so as to send proposals to the Government for sanction. It is also stated that all eligible beneﬁciaries under IAY scheme were identiﬁed and housing was taken up for them in the colony, that ration cards were also issued to all the eligible persons and that the action is being taken to assign the house sites to 72 eligible beneﬁciaries duly cancelling the previously issued pattas, for which, the sites were not occupied. As the counter aﬃdavit was very vague as to whether the petitioners were among the eligible beneﬁciaries for the above-mentioned reliefs, this Court has directed respondent No.3 to ﬁle an additional counter aﬃdavit. Accordingly, an additional counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled, wherein a tabular statement is given in respect of all the petitioners furnishing details of various reliefs provided to them. While most of the petitioners were given relief of supply of rice at 25 kgs, substantial number among the petitioners were sanctioned houses under IAY housing scheme and 13 of the petitioners were given land. In the additional counter aﬃdavit, it is stated that in addition to the Three-Member Committee referred to above, the Principal Secretary to Government (Social Welfare), the Joint Collector, Guntur and the Additional Superintendent of Police, Guntur were appointed as Enquiry Oﬃcers to conduct a detailed enquiry into the matter and accordingly a joint report was submitted, in which, it was reported that it was not clearly mentioned in the charge sheet as to how Section 3(1)(x)(xiv) of the Act could be applied on the allegations contained in the FIR. It is further stated that the allegation of social boycott is not included in the list of atrocities mentioned in the said case. The learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare stated that depending upon the severity of the atrocities perpetrated on the SC, ST and BC in Oppircherla Village, relief measures have been undertaken and that most of the petitioners were given the relief of distribution of rice at 25 kgs per head. The learned Government Pleader further stated that the recommendations of the Committee were strictly implemented. In the light of the submissions of the learned Government Pleader, this Court is convinced that the respondents have extended the reliefs to the victims of atrocities on the fact ﬁnding made by the Committee constituted for this purpose and that no interference in this regard is called for. For the above-mentioned reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.15430 of 2009 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 25th November, 2011 VGB