IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 12119 of 2009 Between: Razia Begum, W/o. Late A.H. Siddiqui, R/o. H.No. 10-5-8/4/B, Late Opp : Canara Bank, Ahmednagar Branch, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep.by its Commissioner and Special Officer, Tank Bund,Hyderabad 3 The Allotment Committee, rep.by its Chairman and Additional Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad 4 The Bagh Amberpet Welfare Society, rep.by its President bearing Registration No.599/1981, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad-500013 ...RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or writ one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not allotting the plot MIG-II under HUDCO Scheme 1974 at Bathkammakunta, Bagh Amberpet in pursuance of Notification dated 8.4.1974 and not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 13-10-1974 & 25.3.2004 and proceeding to allot the plot to others as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and consequently call for the records and direct the respondents to allot the plot in Bathkammakunta under MIG-II Scheme and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 12119 of 2009 ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not allotting Plot EWS.II under HUDCO Scheme 1974 pursuant to the Notification dated 08- 04-1974 and not considering the representations made by the petitioner on 13-10-2003 & 25-03-2004, are arbitrary and illegal. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by an order of this Court passed in W.P.19082 of 2008 dated 9.4.2008, which was disposed of with a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to consider the representations made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. There was also a direction that till such orders are passed, one plot under MIG category shall be kept reserved for being allotted to the petitioner in the event of her finding eligible after due enquiry. The fact that the petitioner herein is also similarly situated is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation. In the circumstances, following the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.19082 of 2008 dated 9.4.2009, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to consider the representations of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. Till such time, one plot under MIG category shall be kept reserved for being allotted to the petitioner in the event of her finding eligible for allotment, after due enquiry. No costs. _______________ Justice G.Rohini Date: 30.06.2009 mrb