THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.32784 of 2010 Date : 8-3-2011 Between : Sampengula Rathamma and another .. Petitioner and The District Collector, Prakasam District, at Ongole and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioners : Sri Y.Subba Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 : A.G.P. for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondent No.4 : Sri D.V.Sudhir Kumar, Standing Counsel for A.P.Housing Corporation Limited The Court made the following : ORDER: At the Interlocutory stage, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties. This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to conduct enquiry and submit proposals in “column 39 proforma” for sanction of houses under Indiramma Scheme to the petitioners in terms of letter No.A4/147/Grievance/2010, dated 29-7-2010 of respondent No.4. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they are eligible for sanction of houses under the Indiramma Housing Scheme as evident from letter dated 29-7-2010 by respondent No.4, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have not been including their names in the “39 column proforma” for sanction of houses under the said Scheme. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Project Director of respondent No.4 wherein it is inter alia stated that the Tahsildar, Mandal Parishad Development Officer and the Assistant Engineer (Housing), J.Pangulur Mandal, have jointly enquired into the petitioners’ claims and submitted proposals through Executive Engineer (Housing), Ongole, vide Rc.No.01/AE/Additions/2011, dated 7-1-2011 for sanction of houses in favour of the petitioners and other beneficiaries. It is further averred that so far 135 beneficiaries are sanctioned the houses under the Indiramma Housing Scheme, Phase-I during the period 2006-07 of which 118 houses were roof casted, 7 houses are under roof level, 2 houses are at lintel level, 4 houses are at basement level, 4 houses are not started and that the proposals for sanction of houses in favour of the petitioners are under process. In support of this averment, No.4 has filed a copy of “39 column proforma” wherein the names of the petitioners are included at Sl.Nos.5 and 6. No reply affidavit is filed controverting the above averments. Having regard to the stand taken by respondent No.4 in the counter affidavit and supported by the material filed in support thereof, the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.41651/2010 is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY.,J Date: 8-3-2011 AM