THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.16968 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner is a resident of Kakinada, East Godavari District. He claims to be the Secretary of a Society, which is registered for the welfare of SCs, STs and BCs. His grievance is about a clause contained in Circular Memo, dated 22.04.2006. The Government of A.P. has not only evolved schemes for providing houses or house sites to the poor, but also mentioned the pattern of allocation thereof. G.O.Ms.No.90, Social Welfare (LA.1) Department, dated 24.09.2001, was issued directing that the allocation of houses or house sites earmarked for weaker sections shall be 40% for S.Cs., 10% for S.Ts., 30% for B.Cs., 10% for minorities and 10% for O.B.Cs. Circular memo, dated 22.04.2006, was issued prescribing the guidelines for implementation of a scheme of providing house sites and other benefits, which is abbreviated as ‘INDIRAMMA’. In the memo, it is mentioned that the allotments can be made in relaxation of the pattern mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.90, dated 24.09.2001. The petitioner submits that such relaxation is contrary to law, and would run contrary to the very spirit underlying the protection accorded to the weaker sections of the society of that constitution. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the impugned memo is issued for better implementation of the programme and that the interests of SCs., STs., and BCs., shall be certainly taken care of. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. A definite policy was evolved by issuing G.O.Ms.No.90, dated 24.02.2001. In case any modification thereof is felt necessary, it ought to have been done through another G.O., of similar nature. The pattern of allotment provided for under the G.O. cannot be altered by issuing a memo. This is on procedural aspect. Even on substantive aspect, the respondents are not able to justify the deviation from the prescribed policy. It is not as if the percentages mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.90, dated 24.09.2001, were identified whimsically. A perusal of Section 14 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, discloses that almost similar pattern was stipulated for distribution of surplus land that accrued to the Government in the course of implementation of the scheme. When the method of allocation is recognized even under statutes, there was absolutely no basis for the respondents in deviating from the same, in respect of some of the claims. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed, and it is directed that the allocation of houses or house sites shall be done, under various schemes, in accordance with the percentages mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.90, dated 24.09.2001. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.30.03.2010. GJ