Kerala High Court: Extending Assistance To Eligible Students With Disabilities Cannot Be Defeated By Reluctance & Apathy Of Ground-Level Implementation Officers
The Kerala High Court issued directions for the State Authorities in a Writ Petition concerning the scholarship to be given to students with disabilities.
The Kerala High Court has remarked that extending assistance to eligible students with disabilities cannot be defeated by the reluctance and apathy of ground-level implementation officers.
The Court issued directions for the State Authorities (Respondents) in a Writ Petition concerning the scholarship to be given to students with disabilities. The primary grievance of the Petitioner was regarding the non-disbursal of scholarships to eligible students. The Petitioner called upon the State Authorities to take effective steps to disburse the amounts of scholarship amounts. The Petitioner also sought the implementation of the guidelines under the Five-Year Plan in respect of the subsidiary-related projects for eligible students.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S Manu held, “Transparency in implementation has to be achieved by making it mandatory to publish the beneficiary list and financial disbursements on official website. A mechanism has to be put in place to identify and rectify instances of non-compliance by Panchayats, so that failures in implementation can be immediately addressed.”
Senior Advocate Santhosh Mathew appeared for the Petitioner, while Senior Government Pleader V. Tekchand represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The State of Kerala, on 22 September 2015, formulated a policy to address the issues faced by the persons with disabilities. The policy included establishing an integrated management system for co-ordination across the Government sectors, developing capacity-building strategies to enhance policy implementation, formulating a comprehensive action plan with public education to challenge societal prejudices, and creating State-level structures like the Department of Disability Affairs and the Kerala State Disability Council for operational planning across sectors.
In furtherance of the policy, in 2017, the State issued a Government Order formulating guidelines in respect of the scheme and welfare measures to be implemented by various Local Self Government Institutions (LSGIs). In the 13th Five-Year Plan (2017-2022) prepared by the Local Self Government Department (LSGD), the State issued guidelines for the LSGIs. Clause 10 of the guidelines deals with grants for persons with physical and mental disability, especially students.
Court’s Observations
During the hearing, the Court found that, apart from the apathy of the LSGIs, the officers of the State in the LSGD also showed disinterest and indifference.
“This was clear when a statement was made on oath by one Ms. Gopika Udayan, Under Secretary, in the counter affidavit dated 24 October 2024 that the State had identified and enlisted eligible students for extension of financial assistance and scholarships, and strict directions had been given to the LSGIs for scrupulous implementation,” the Bench remarked.
Based on this statement, when the Court directed that the data of eligible students of at least the last twelve months be placed on record, the Senior Government Pleader, upon instructions received from the Principal Secretary, submitted that the data of eligible students, who had been granted scholarships in the last twelve months, was not available and it would take some time to collect the data.
“Thus, the statement made by the Under Secretary on oath was incorrect and misleading. It was only out of indulgence that the Court did not proceed to take action against this Under Secretary and placed a warning on record to be careful in future. Thus, there was no data with the State as to how many eligible students had been awarded scholarships, even for the last twelve months, let alone from the inception when the policy was introduced. Thus, this is the state of affairs in the LSGD as well, which is responsible for ensuring the proper implementation of the policy,” the Bench stated.
“The issue of non-implementation of this beneficial scheme in several cases is a matter of serious concern. Even the State does not have a complete data with it. Without the basic data, there cannot be effective monitoring by the LSGD of the policy,” the Bench emphasised.
Consequently, the Court held, “The benevolent policy of the State, extending assistance to eligible students, cannot be allowed to be defeated by the reluctance and apathy of ground-level implementation officers. The State is also duty bound to ensure implementation of its own policies and take deterrent action for the failure. Thus, it is necessary to direct the State to ensure strict compliance with the Government Circulars and provide for consequences, place responsibilities, and take disciplinary action.”
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the Writ Petition.
Cause Title: Martin Paul v. State of Kerala & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:27081)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Santhosh Mathew; Advocates Arun Thomas, Jennis Stephen, Vijay V. Paul, Karthika Maria, Anil Sebastian Pulickel, Divya Sara George and Jaisy Elza Joe
Respondents: Senior Government Pleader V. Tekchand; Advocate Issac M.Perumpillil, Varghese C.Kuriakose, G.Santhosh Kumar (P), Dinesh Mathew J.Muricken, Anoop.V.Nair, K.S.Arun Kumar, V.A.Vinod, Babu Karukapadath, Mathew B. Kurian, K.T.Thomas, M.A.Vaheeda Babu, Justine Jacob, P.G.Jose, V.P.Poulose, Nikitha Antony, Resmi Thomas, P.U.Vinod Kumar, A.P.Beelamma, Avinash P Raveendran, Amrutha K P, Arya Raghunath and Amrutha P S