IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18475 of 2002 Between: C. Harinath ..... PETITIONER AND The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department and others. .....RESPONDENTS 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 a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 20.12.2001 submitted on 22.12.2001 along with the supporting documents pursuant to the Notification No. 966/EO/MCH/2001, dated 7.12.2001 of the 4th Respondent published in Vaartha Telugu Daily, dated 11.12.2001 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to allot a house plot of 400 Sq. Yards to the petitioner, duly considering his eligibility and pass such further or other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.NIRANJAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOUSING The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO :18475 of 2002 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction by way of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the representation dated 20.12.2001 submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the notification dated 7.12.2001 issued by the 4th respondent as illegal and arbitrary. He also sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to allot house plot of 400 square yards to him, duly considering his eligibility. It appears, in the year 1974, the Government notified an extent of Acs. 22.33 guntas of land situated at Bagh Amberpet for construction of houses under HUDCO Housing Scheme vide G.O. Ms. No.55, dated 23.2.1974. The said acquisition proceedings were challenged by a Cooperative Society, by name, Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society and also the owners of the land in two writ petitions before this Court. It was the claim of the cooperative society that it had entered into agreement with the owners to purchase the land for providing house sites to its members. However, there is another society by name, Bagh Amberpet Welfare Society, which has also impleaded itself in the proceedings on the ground that the land was acquired for the benefit of the members of the said society. The writ petitions were heard and disposed of by this Court. The matters were carried before the Supreme Court in three Civil Appeals, namely, Civil Appeal Nos.6986-6987 of 1994, 6983-6991 of 1994 and 6992- 6993 of 1994. All the three Civil Appeals were filed by the Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society. The Hon’ble Supreme Court by its judgment dated 14.9.1999, while setting aside the directions issued by this Court in the writ petitions disposed of the aforementioned Civil Appeals with the following directions: “(I) The directions contained in the judgment of the High Court are set aside; (II) The land acquisition proceedings covered by the Notification under Section 4(1) of the Acquisition Act issued in G.O. Rt No.68, dated 4.6.75 in respect of 18 acres 03 guntas of land stand revived and shall be completed as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months from today; (III) The concerned authorities constituted under Acquisition Act shall decide the compensation payable to the land owner in accordance with the Provisions of the Act; (IV) The Government shall nominate a Committee comprising at least three Secretaries to the Government for distributing the acquired land equitably among deserving persons in order to carry out the purposes of the acquisition and to balance the equities between various persons whether they belong to one or the other society or are not members of either society. (V) M/s. Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society is at liberty to work out its rights as against the land owner in appropriate proceedings”. Pursuant to the aforementioned directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Government of Andhra Pradesh has constituted a Three men Committee consisting of Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development; Principal Secretary, Housing Department and Principal Secretary, Revenue Department vide proceedings in G.O. Ms. No.310, MA & U.D. Department, dated 22.5.2000. The said Committee has prepared an action plan for implementation of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for disbursement of land to the deserving persons of the Bagh Amberpet Welfare Society and Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society and the selected beneficiaries under the category of flood victims. The Three Men Committee appointed by the Government further appointed a Verification Committee for verification of the genuineness of the claims and in order to consider such claims, a notification dated 7.12.2001 was issued by the respondent-Corporation informing the members of the Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society directing them to produce the documents mentioned in the said notification before the Additional Commissioner(East Zone), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad on 22.12.2001 for verification. Pursuant to the same, the Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society appeared before the said Committee and sought time for producing necessary documents. The petitioner who is claiming to be one of the members of the said housing society made a representation on 20.12.2001 requesting for allotment of one plot. Subsequently, the President of Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society also furnished the list of their members before the said Committee. Though the petitioner was claiming a plot as a member of the said society, but in the list of members furnished by the society, the name of the petitioner did not find place. Further the petitioner also did not appear before the Verification Committee on 24.4.2002. As such, the request of the petitioner was not considered for allotment of a plot. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a member of Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society and has also remitted certain amounts, which were also remitted the society’s account and as such, he is entitled for the benefit of allotment of plot pursuant to the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel further contends that though the respondents have issued the notification dated 7.12.2001 directing the members of Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society to furnish the list of documents mentioned in the said notification pursuant to the directions issued by the Hon’ble the Supreme Court, in spite of the petitioner making an application in that regard, his claim was not considered. A counter affidavit and additional counter affidavit are filed by the respondents. It is evident from the counter affidavit filed by the respondents that though the petitioner claimed to be a member of Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society, but in the list of the members furnished by the said society, the name of the petitioner did not find place. Apart from the same, though there was an opportunity to the petitioner to appear before the Verification Committee pursuant to the notification which was published in newspaper, the petitioner did not appear before the said Committee to prove the genuineness of his claim. In that view of the matter, the claim of the petitioner has not been rightly considered by the respondents. Further when the matter was listed on the last occasion, learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to verify if any plots or vacant place is available for consideration, at this juncture. Even though it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is material to show that the petitioner is a member of the Tulasi Cooperative Housing Society, but, in the absence of the petitioner’s name being found in the list of members furnished by the society, the petitioner cannot claim any benefit pursuant to the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. More over, even though the petitioner had opportunity to furnish the relevant documents before the Verification Committee, the petitioner did not appear before the said Committee and produce any supporting material to prove his claim. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that the claim of the petitioner was not considered by the respondents pursuant to the notification dated 7.12.2001, which was published in the daily newspaper on 11.12.2001. As such, I do not find any infirmity or illegality warranting grant of any direction by this Court. The writ petition is devoid of any merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY,J DATE: 31.7.2009 pnb