Palair Indiramma house row: Officials say family eligible
Khammam housing officials clarified that a Palair Indiramma scheme beneficiary met eligibility criteria despite controversy over her remarks. An enquiry found the family had no land, lived in poor conditions, and had not violated any rules under the scheme.
Khammam: The district housing officials have issued a clarification over media reports on an Indiramma housing scheme beneficiary who claimed that her son was in London and her daughter was working in the electricity department.
In a statement here on Saturday, Housing Project Director Srinivas stated that the house in question was sanctioned to a below poverty line family as per government guidelines, based on Indiramma Committee recommendations and reports of concerned officials. The family met the eligibility criteria.
An enquiry was conducted following directions of District Collector TS Divakara in the wake of reports circulating across various media platforms concerning remarks made by the beneficiary, Pilli Neelamma, during a ‘Praja Darbar’ held on April 29 in Palair gram panchayat.
It was found that the family currently possesses no land and their house was in a dilapidated condition. Neelamma works as a daily-wage labourer and her husband, Pilli Mallaiah, was a fisherman. The family had previously sold a portion of their land to meet their livelihood requirements and had also incurred debt to fund their son’s travel abroad. Although their daughter completed her Engineering degree (EEE), she was not employed in a government department.
The woman’s son received 16,000 pounds out of a total tuition fee of 16,560 pounds in the form of a ‘Global Gold Excellence Scholarship’ from the University of Salford, Manchester, the Project Director noted.
During the enquiry, Neelamma stated that she had made a mistake in her remarks as it was her first time speaking on a public platform. Their son had gone to London only after the Indiramma house was sanctioned to them. To fund his education abroad, they had secured a loan and sold approximately 1.25 acres of land belonging to her in-laws, with relatives contributing the remaining funds.
She clarified that their daughter was working in the private sector, not in a government department, while asserting that they had not deceived anyone, Srinivas said, adding that the government was implementing welfare schemes transparently for eligible beneficiaries.
