1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:19.09.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.(MD)Nos.10591 to 10597 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1,1,1,1,1,1and 1 of 2011 G.Joshpin Gnana Oli :Petitioner IN WP(MD)No.10591/11 S.Rajendran :Petitioner IN WP(MD)No.10592/11 S.Visalatchi :Petitioner IN WP(MD)No.10593/11 G.Vasantha :Petitioner IN WP(MD)No.10594/11 K.Mahalingam :Petitioner IN WP(MD)No.10595/11 M.Ramalingam :Petitioner IN WP(MD)No.10596/11 S.L.Sivakumar :Petitioner IN WP(MD)No.10597/11 -Vs- 1.The Executive Engineer cum Administrative Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Thanjavur Housing Unit, Pudukottai Road, Thanjavur. 2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 493, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. 3.The Government of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. :Respondents PRAYER:Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent letter dated 24.02.2011 fixing the land cost at Rs.80/- per square feet and quash the same as illegal and to pass a direction to the first respondent to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of House H.I.G.51, HIG 177, MIG 186, MIG 285, HIG 407, MIG 180 and HIG 118 respectively, Tamil University Campus, Thanjavur without demanding any further payment. For Petitioner :Mr.M.Senthilkumar in all cases For Respondents:Mr.K.Balasubramanian for R.1 and R.2 in all cases :Mr.M.Govindan, Special Government Pleader for R.3 in all cases COMMON ORDER These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent letter dated 24.02.2011, 22.02.2011 fixing the land cost at Rs.80/- per square feet and quash the same as illegal and to pass a direction to the first respondent to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of Houses H.I.G.51, H.I.G.177, M.I.G.186, M.I.G.285, H.I.G.407, M.I.G.180 and H.I.G.118 Tamil University Campus, Thanjavur without demanding any further payment. 2.Heard Mr.V.S.Ramalingam, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.K.Balasubramanian, learned Counsel, who takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader who takes notice for third the respondent. 3.By consent, the writ petitions itself are taken up for final disposal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4.The petitioners in all these cases claim that they have purchased fully built up house developed by the first respondent in the Tamil University Campus. According to the petitioners, they have made initial deposit and they also paid balance costs towards land together with interest. In effect, the petitioner paid the entire amount due for purchased of the land and building from the first respondent and the final payment was made in the year 2005. The sale deed, however, has not been given. The petitioners state that they have made a representation on 13.07.2010 for issuance of sale deed and thereafter the impugned letter/demand has been made on 24.02.2011 inter alia contending that the petitioners will have to pay additional amount towards land costs. The learned Counsel for the petitioners states that they have already paid the entire costs in respect of the land and building and therefore no further demand can be raised. He also relies upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in K.V. Krishnan Vs. The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board and Another reported in 2004-1-L.W. 428 and a judgment in A.Saravanan Vs. The Executive Engineer cum Administrative Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Trichy and Another ireported in 2007(5) CTC 340 . 5.The learned Counsel for the respondents states that if the petitioners have grievance and valid objections as against the said demand, they can make a detailed representation on the basis their objections and the authority will consider the same on its own merits and accordance with law. 6.At this stage, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits and demerits of the demand made by the authority or the stand taken by the petitioners. The petitioners are directed to make a detailed representation to the second respondent in the light of the decisions as referred above, as may applicable and the authority shall consider the said representation on its own merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioner. It is made clear that this Court does not express any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's case and the authority shall consider the same on its own merits and to deal with all the issues raised in the representation as per law. 7.The Writ Petitions are disposed of as above. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No Costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Executive Engineer cum Administrative Officer,Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Thanjavur Housing Unit, Pudukottai Road, Thanjavur. 2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 493, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. 3.The Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. +6CC's to Mr.M.Senthilkumar, Advocate. SR.Nos.31991 to 31996. +7CC's to Mr.K.Balasubramanian, Advocate. SR.No.32058. +1CC to The Special Government Pleader. SR.No.32230. RP/18.10.2011/2P/18C. W.P.(MD)Nos.10591 to 10597 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1,1,1,1,1,1and 1 of 2011,19.09.2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/