THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32072 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent in not considering the representations dated 28.06.2011, 27.07.2011 and 06.09.2011 made by the petitioner, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently, direct the respondent to demarcate and deliver possession of plot No. EWS 36 under I.D.S.M.T. Scheme at Medak District to the petitioner. 2. The averments, in brief, stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition may be stated as follows: In pursuance of the notification of the respondent for allotment of plots under town expansion scheme phase – I for different categories i.e., E.W.S., L.I.G. and M.I.G., the petitioner applied for allotment of plot under E.W.S. category. In response to the application of the petitioner, the respondent issued letter dated 28.04.1999 intimating that the plots will be allotted by draw. On 10.05.1989, the respondent issued a letter to the petitioner intimating that plot No. EWS E-36 was allotted in her favour and directed her to pay a sum of Rs.8,700/- in four installments. The petitioner paid the entire amount as per the directions of the respondent. Though considerable period had been elapsed and in spite of making representations continuously by the petitioner, the respondent failed either to deliver possession of the plot or to give reply to the representations. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in pursuance of the allotment of plot made in favour of the petitioner, she paid the entire amounts due, but the respondent has not transferred the plot in her name; that therefore, the petitioner gave representations on 28.06.2011, 27.07.2011 and also on 06.09.2011; and hence, he prays to issue a direction to the respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel for the respondent contended that the respondent would consider the representations of the petitioner in accordance with law. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of paying all the amounts due as demanded by the respondent, he is not transferring the plot in her favour. For that purpose, the petitioner gave representations to the respondent, but till now no action has been taken. Appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondent on the aforementioned representations made by the petitioner in accordance with law. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to take appropriate decision on the representations of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J December 12, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Dated: 12.12.2011 PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32072 OF 2011 Between: Sahab Sultana ..... PETITIONER AND The Commissioner, Municipality, Medak District ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32072 OF 2011 December 12, 2011 MD