Why aid to 80L BPL families denied: HC

The Telangana High Court asked the government why it had stopped providing the Covid-19 financial assistance of `1,500 to below poverty line families who had not taken the rice for three months before the lockdown began.

A division bench of the High Court had earlier ordered the government to disburse the amount irrespective of whether the families had taken ration goods or not.

On Tuesday, a division bench of Chief Justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan and B. Vijaysen Reddy asked AdvocateGeneral B.S. Prasad why the government was so rigid in implementing court orders. The bench was dealing with PILs filed separately by Srujana Amanganti and social activist S.Q. Maqsood.

The Advocate General said that the government had appealed the order in the Supreme Court by filing a special leave petition on June 2, and it is yet to be taken up by it. If the SLP was rejected, the government would abide by the High Court order. Observing that it was strange that the High Court orders were beginning to fall on deaf ears of the government, the bench directed the Advocate General to ensure that High Court orders are implemented because the Supreme Court had not stayed them. The bench pointed out that there was no rule which says that a beneficiary will not be provided with 12 kg rice if ration was not drawn for the previous three months. The case was adjourned to June 22.

Meanwhile, responding to the state government’s comments that frivolous PILs were being filed in relation to the Covid-19 situation, the High Court on Tuesday observed that the PILs were government should not feel such cases are against the it and should consider them as grievances of the public. The High Court was dealing with PILs related to the plight of guest workers.

The court asked the government why it was neglecting sending the guest workers back home when uses and Shramik Special trains were functional. The court directed the government to inform what efforts it had made to send guest workers back home.