THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.31996 OF 2010 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the housing grant to nearly 600 Project Affected Families under SPVBR-Telugu Ganga Project, who are below the poverty line, only on the ground that their houses were not covered with pucca concrete roof, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to release the said housing grant to those families, who were found with constructed houses not covered with pucca concrete roof, without reference to the said condition provided the value of their constructed houses is more than Rs.25,000/- on par with National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy-2007 or as the last resort to re-survey the stage of the construction of houses of the remaining about 600 project affected families and to release the said amount. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the petitioner Association represents all the displaced persons in six villages submerged under the SPVB Reservoir under the Telugu Ganga Project, Kadapa District. The Central Government has given the environmental clearance to State Government subject to the condition of preparing a comprehensive Rehabilitation Master Plan to bring the project affected persons to the same and better level than the time before the displacement. Accordingly, the State Government constituted a rehabilitation cell to prepare the Rehabilitation Master Plan (for short, ‘R.M.P.’). The Rehabilitation Cell constituted under G.O.Ms.No.30, dated 15.02.1994, prepared an abstract of the rehabilitation master plan and arrived at an outlay of an amount of Rs.17.18 crores towards various measures incorporated in the R.M.P. The R.M.P. was prepared in the year 1992 whereas the members of the petitioner Association were displaced from their habitations as early as 1987-88 and the abstract prepared by the rehabilitation cell was sent to the Central Government during the year 1996 and the same was accepted by the Central Government and G.O.Ms.No.58, dated 01.06.1996, was issued sanctioning the total outlay of Rs.17.18 crores for the implementation of the said plan. When the respondents have not taken up the implementation of the R.M.P. and by taking up measures enumerated in the R.M.P. as per G.O.Ms.No.324, dated 01.12.1988, the petitioner Association had to approach this Court on number of occasions, but the State Government has not implemented the same. So far as integrating anti poverty alleviation programmes into the R.M.P. efforts, no action was taken. The petitioner association made number of representations, but no further progress was made and hence, it filed W.P.No.15204 of 2006 to direct the respondents to extend the various state Government Anti Poverty Alleviation Programmes wherein interim direction was granted to the respondents to extend the anti poverty alleviation programmes. When the respondents did not implement the schemes, the petitioner Association filed C.C.No.568 of 2008 and the same was closed directing the respondents to consider for releasing the amounts, as per law, within two months from the date of receipt of that order. The displaced families eligible against the said benefit have represented to release the amount in terms of scheme, but the respondents have not released the same and hence, it filed second contempt case No.1430 of 2008 and the same was closed observing that only the displaced persons with houses constructed pucca roof are eligible for grant under anti- poverty alleviation scheme and that persons, who do not possess the house with pucca roof, as required under the scheme, are not eligible, but it was made clear that it would not preclude the respondents from considering the cases of other people those who are found to be within poverty line and do not possess the houses with pucca roofing. The condition of possession of house with pucca roofing for eligibility to grant Rs.25,000/- under the Anti Poverty Alleviation Scheme is arbitrary. The petitioner Association made representations on 16.05.2010 and 11.10.2010 to conduct re-enquiry as to the status of the houses of the said 600 project affected persons and further submitted that they have also laid the concrete roof for entitlement to the benefit of Rs.25,000/- cash grant under the anti-poverty alleviation scheme. The other left out nearly 600 project affected families have also complied with the conditions of the scheme i.e., possessing pucca roofed houses as on today and they are also entitled as PAPs and persons below the poverty line to get the benefit of one time grant in view of construction of house and in which case there is no need to conduct any enquiry by the respondents as to the status of the house for granting the said benefit. The respondents neither conducted re- enquiry nor allowed the grant without any enquiry. The first enquiry speaks that nearly 600 people are not given the said benefit only on the ground that they were not covered under any scheme though they have constructed some houses with AC sheet or thatched houses and the value of the said buildings in most of the cases is more than Rs.1.00 lakh. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Association stated that the petitioner Association represents the displaced persons under the S.P.V.B. Reservoir under the Telugu Ganga Project, Kadapa District and as per G.O.Ms.No.21, Housing (RH.A1) Department, dated 02.07.2011, and G.O.Rt.No.153 Irrigation & CAD (Projects Wing- L.A.IV-R&R.II) Department, dated 07.03.2007, the case of the petitioner Association has to be considered by respondent Nos.1 and 2. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.2 contended that appropriate decision would be taken by respondent Nos.1 and 2 after considering the case of the petitioner Association, as per the said G.Os. 5. It is not in dispute before this Court that the petitioner Association represents the displaced persons under the S.P.V.B. Reservoir under the Telugu Ganga Project, Kadapa District. Whether the petitioner Association is entitled for the housing grant in terms of G.O.Ms.No.21, Housing (RH.A1) Department, dated 02.07.2011, and G.O.Rt.No.153 Irrigation & CAD (Projects Wing-L.A.IV-R&R.II) Department, dated 07.03.2007 or not, has to be considered by respondent Nos.1 and 2 for which petitioner Association is said to have given a representation to respondent Nos.1 and 2 prior to passing of these G.Os. Therefore, the petitioner Association is at liberty to give fresh representation to respondent Nos.1 and 2 and after receipt of the said representation, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to take appropriate decision in terms of the said two G.Os. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J 30th December, 2011. Note:- Furnish CC within three days. B/o AMD HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.31996 OF 2010 Date:30.12.2011 AMD