THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WP NO. 3521 OF 2010 Date of Judgment: 14.11.2011 Between: East West Marine Engineering Works rep. By its Managing Partner, M.N. Subramanyam …Petitioner and The Government of A.P. and others ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WP NO. 3521 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner complains of inaction on the part of respondents 2 and 3 in allotting the land to the petitioner as per the decision of the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Infrastructure & Investment (Ports-I) Department in Memo No. 906/P.I (1)/2008-1, dated 5.5.2008 as well as G.O.Ms.No. 8, I & I, (Ports-I), Department, dated 3.3.2008 and the petitioner seeks a consequential direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to allot Ac. 3.81 cents of land as per the memo aforesaid. Third respondent has filed a counter-affidavit wherein in para-6 it is specifically stated as follows, “6. In reply to para 7 of the writ affidavit it is submitted that even though the Government as well as the petitioner have requested to identify and allot the remaining extent of Ac.3.81 cents of land this respondent could not be allotted the said land since no such land (shore front area) is available adjacent to the existing Ac.16.19 cents of land. It is submitted that an extent of Ac.5.00 of port land is available in plot Nos. 38 which is adjacent to the Dummulapeta Creek at Kakinanda Port. The petitioner’s firm has already been requested to approach this office to take over the remaining extent of Ac.3.81 cents of land in the plot No. 38 from the Port Authorities on or before 30.04.2010 vide this office Lr.No. PC (I- I)/173/2010, dated 20.03.2010. The contention of the petitioner that the inaction on the part of the respondents 2 and 3 in complying order issued by the respondent No.1 is nothing but abdication of the statutory duty cast on them and the respondents 2 and 3 are not responding to the request of the petitioner for allotment of the remaining extent of Ac.3.81 as directed by the respondent No.1 is denied. The respondents 2 and 3 have taken all possible steps to allot the remaining extent of land admeasuring Ac.3.81 cents of land. But due to non availability of land petitioner is shown Ac.5.00 of port land in plot No. 38 which is adjacent to the Dummulapeta Creek at Kakinanda. But the petitioner has not approached the 3rd respondent as per the letter dated 20.3.2010”. It appears that the petitioner has not approached the third respondent in spite of the letter of third respondent dated 20.3.2010. The inaction is, therefore, denied by the respondents and in fact, the respondents stated that they are prepared to allot the land to the petitioner being plot No. 38. In view of the above, therefore, there is no inaction on the part of the respondents as alleged and hence while declining to grant the writ of mandamus sought for, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the third respondent for the purpose of allotment of land as intimated by the third respondent in the letter dated 20.3.2010 and thereafter the third respondent shall consider the petitioner’s request and pass appropriate orders expeditiously. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dt. 14.11.2011 KR