IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 21225 of 2001 BETWEEN: 1 Sri. B.G.Prakasham, S/o. B. Devadana, R/o. Donakonda, Prakasam District. 2 M. Adayya, S/o. M. Maruthi Narayana, R/o. Payakaraopeta Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 3 S.B. Ramesh Babu, S/o. Late Balaram, R/o. 11-6-515, Nampally, Hyderabad. 4 Dr. Sujata Manohar, W/o. Late Dr. R.M.Manohar, R/o. 1-10- 125/33, Indira Nilayam, Mayur Marg, Begumpet, Hyderabad-16. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Special Secretary to State Legislature, Hyderabad. 2 Vijaya Co-operative House Building Society Limited, Rep. by its Person-in-Charge, Quarter NO.189, New M.L.A. Quarters, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioners' applications for allotment of house sites as arbitrary illegal and consequently direct them to consider the allotment of house sites to the petitioners at the earliest and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.SRI RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAW & LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioners seek a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering their applications for allotment of house sites in the second respondent – society, which is said to have been formed in 1994 for procuring house-sites for the legislators. Similarly situated persons have been admitted as members in the society and house-sites were allotted but the second respondent- society failed to allot residential plots to the petitioners. 2. None appears either for the petitioners or for the respondents. 3. Except ﬁling one undated representation addressed to the Honourable Chief Minister marking a copy to the Secretary of the second respondent-society there is no other application or any information about the date of application and the action taken thereon under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act (for short ‘the Act’) and the rules made thereunder and the byelaws of the second respondent-society. The writ petition filed by the petitioners is very vague and bereft of any material particulars, therefore, I am of the opinion that the question of declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the applications of the petitioners as illegal and arbitrary does not arise. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioners to approach the second respondent – society and the concerned competent authorities seeking appropriate relief in accordance with law prescribed under the Act and the Rules made thereunder and the byelaws of the second respondent – society. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J August 26, 2008 DSK