The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition Nos.8064, 7939, 7942, 8157, 8007 & 10115 of 2011 Date: 23-11-2011 Common Order: Since the issues raised in these Writ Petitions are common, they are being heard and disposed of together. The petitioners are educational institutions. The Government has evolved a policy providing for Post Metric Scholarships and GOs were being issued from time to time. By G.O.Ms.No.143, Social Welfare (EDN.2) Department, dated 15-07-2008, the Government has modiﬁed its earlier Order contained in GO.Ms.No.90, Social Welfare (Edn.2) Department, dated 30-07-2002, regulating fees reimbursement for SC, ST, BC, EBC, Minorities and physically challenged students in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Subsequently, the Government has come out with G.O.Ms.No.66, Social Welfare (SW.EDN.2) Department, dated 08-09-2010, wherein it has restricted the application of scheme of Post Metric Scholarships, which include Reimbursement of Tuition Fee (RTF) and maintenance fee charges (MTF), only to the students, who are admitted on merit under Convener quota. In other words, the students, who got admissions in the second and subsequent rounds of counselling, which are otherwise called spot admissions in the left over seats, are rendered ineligible for reimbursement of Post Metric Scholarships, RTF and MTF. When these Scholarships were not released in favour of majority students admitted by the petitioners, they have ﬁled these Writ Petitions. In the counter-aﬃdavits, ﬁled on behalf of the oﬃcial respondents, it is inter alia stated that the State Government has revised its earlier policy of providing scholarships to all the students belonging to SC, ST, BC, EBC and physically challenged students irrespective of whether they were admitted under Convener quota or otherwise; that as per the revised policy announced in GO.Ms.No.66, dated 08-09- 2010, the eligibility of the students belonging to the SC, ST, BC, EBC, Minority and physically challenged is restricted to those, who are admitted under the Convener quota; that when clariﬁcations were sought as to the eligibility of the students, who were admitted under spot admissions prior to 2010-2011 and have not completed their courses for receiving the scholarships, the Government issued Memo No.1611/SW.Edn.2/2011-2, dated 03-02-2011, wherein, in paragraph 4, it is clarified as under: “All Welfare Oﬃcers are requested to ensure that these instructions are made available to all colleges in the districts and veriﬁcation oﬃcers, so as to ensure that the veriﬁcation of students admitted under spot admissions prior to the academic year 2010-11 are also veriﬁed and paid scholarships till the completion of their course. Spot admissions shall not be eligible for payment of RTF or MTF from the academic year 2010-11.” In the counter-aﬃdavits, the respondents have given out the details of the students, who were admitted under Convener quota in each of the petitioners’ institutions in the year 2010-11 and it is mentioned that in view of G.O.Ms.No.66, dated 08-09-2010, the petitioners cannot claim reimbursement of fees in respect of students, who were admitted under any quota other than the Convener quota. In my opinion, the petitioners cannot claim any enforceable right, either constitutional or legal, to insist that the State shall reimburse the fees. The petitioners cannot assail the action of the Government, if, as a policy, they decided to restrict grant of scholarships to any particular category of students unless they plead and establish that the classiﬁcation is either irrational or it is not based on any intelligible diﬀerentia having nexus with the object sought to be achieved. The Government evidently wants to encourage only those students belonging to SC, ST, BC, EBC and physically challenged etc., who have merit and were selected under Convener quota for admission into the various professional courses. If the State Government does not want to encourage those, who do not possess merit, it cannot be said that such a policy is either irrational or does not have the nexus with the object sought to be achieved. While there is no constitutional obligation on the part of the State to provide scholarships, the State is coming out with various welfare measures, as a part of aﬃrmative action, in order to uplift the disabled communities in the society. So long as these policies do not aﬀect the legal or constitutional rights of any citizen, the Courts will not interfere with such policies. In this view of the matter, this Court declines to interfere with the revised policy of the State Government, as contained in G.O.Ms.No.66, Social Welfare (SW.EDN.2) Department, dated 08-09-2010. The learned Counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that the respondents may be directed to continue the scheme of reimbursement of scholarships in respect of those students, who have been admitted prior to 2010-11 and have been continuing with their courses. In view of Memo No.1611/SW/EdnmII/2011-2, dated 03-02-2011, the relevant part of which has been reproduced above, this request of the learned Counsel deserves to be accepted. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to reimburse the scholarships in respect of the students, who were admitted under spot admissions prior to the academic year 2010-2011 and are continuing the same, till completion of their courses. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 23rd November, 2011 LUR