IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 7088 of 2006 Between: 1 State Youth Awardees Council, Secunderabad-500 080 rep by President Sri K. Ranga rao S/o Late K. Krishna Murthy R/o 6-6-449, Gandhi Nagar, Secunderabad 2 P. David Christopher S/o James Purushotham, Christian R/o 906, SRT Sanathnagar Colony, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of A.P., repby Principal Secretary, Youth Advancement Tourism & Culture (Sports) Development Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, Sports Authority of A.P., Lalbahadur Stadium, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not releasing the incentives to the 2nd petitioner by disposing of the representation of the 1st petitioner dt 25-02-2006 as illegal, arbitrary in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to release an amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- to the 2nd petitioner as incentive in accordance with G.O.Ms. No. 183 dated 11-10-2000 and pass such other order orders as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.GANDURI NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.V.CH.NAIDU The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No. 7088 of 2006 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not releasing the incentives to the 2nd petitioner, by disposing of the representation of the 1st petitioner dated 25-02-2006, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, and consequently direct the respondents to release an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- to the 2nd petitioner, as incentive, in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.183, dated 11-10-2000. It is stated that the 2nd petitioner is the life-time achievement adventure awardee, for promoting water sports in the entire state of Andhra Pradesh. He is also a certificate holder of Advance Canoeing and Kayaking Coaches Course, conducted by Sports Authority of India and Indian Kayaking and Canoeing Association. As there was no Panel Coach for the Indian Team, the Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh requested him to act as Honorary Coach to give training to the participants in the above events, and accordingly he accepted the same, and that he trained so many boys and girls for the last 12 years, and the said trainees brought laurels to the country by winning the national games. According to the petitioners, under the sports policy, the State Government thought it fit to provide some incentives to the sports persons, as well as the coaches. In that context, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.84, dated 04-05-2000, and G.O.Ms.No.183, dated 11-10-2000, and in terms of said GOs, it is stated that the 2nd petitioner is entitled to get an amount of Rs.1,30,000/-, (i.e. Rs.10,000/- x 13 medals), as incentive. However, since the authorities are not considering the request, the present writ petition is filed. On notice, the learned Standing Counsel, Sri V.Ch. Naidu, filed a detailed counter, on behalf of the 2nd respondent, stating that it is only the coaches, appointed by the Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh, either on permanent basis, or consolidated pay; are entitled to the incentives, provided for under the said G.Os., and as the 2nd petitioner is not one among those, persons, and that he is only an honorary coach, he is not entitled to the benefits. Further, it is also stated that even those coaches, who were sponsored by the Sports Authority, are paid only an amount of Rs.10,000/-, as incentive; and the 2nd petitioner was also requested to receive an amount of Rs.10,000/-, but he refused to receive the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. The facts are not very much in dispute. The 2nd respondent did not deny the fact that the 2nd petitioner is a coach and the trainees who have undergone training under him, did bring laurels to the country, particularly to the state. Further, from a perusal of the said GOs, it is not clear, as to whether the said GOs are applicable only to the coaches sponsored by Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh, or to the coaches like the petitioners. When it is a fact, that the said GOs are issued keeping in mind the sports policy, and when it is the intention of the Government, that sports should be an essential element in human resource development strategy, and provided incentives, it is immaterial whether the person, who brought laurels to the country; is a coach, sponsored by the Sports Authority, or not. The purpose behind the said incentives is to encourage sports. However, as the petitioners have already submitted a representation dated 25-02-2006, the respondents are directed to consider the same, by taking into account the services rendered by the petitioners to the country, particularly to the State of Andhra Pradesh, and give them the required incentives. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J. Dt.12-03-2008 KO To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}