IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 12408 of 2005 Between: 1 Gajjela Pitchaiah, S/o.Nageswara Rao, MIG-II-121, Phase III, APHB Colony, Bhimavaram, W.G.District 2 Gamidi Rajakumari, W/o.Nageswara Rao, MIG-II-130, Phase III, APHB Colony, Bhimavaram, W.G.District. 3 Bonda Ramakrishna, S/o.Seshavatharam, R/o.MIG-II 122, Phase III, APHB Colony, Bhimavaram, W.G.District. 4 K.Bhushanam, S/o.Subba Rao, MIG-I-160, Phase-III, APHB Colony, Bhimavaram, W.G.District. 5 Pedapati Rajababu, S/o.Raja Rao, MIG-II-124, Phase-III, APHB Colony, Bhimavaram, W.G.District. 6 Kadali Srinivas, S/o.Satyanarayana, MIG-II-108 Phase II, APHB Colony,Bhimavaram, W.G.District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Vice Chairman-Cum- Housing Commissioner, APHB, Gruhakalpa, M.J.Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Executive Engineer, APHB, Tadepalligudem, W.G.District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in levying penal interest on the installments due, without taking into account of the amount spent by the petitioners for the various works that have under taken on their respective allotted houses at MIG, Phase II & III, APHB Colony, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District as illegal, unjust and arbitrary and consequently the respondents be directed not to levy any penal interest on the installments due and to pss such other and further orders. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.S.V.MUNI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.D.RANGANATHA KUMAR The Court made the following Order: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.12408 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioners, who are six in number, ﬁled instant writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in levying penal interest on the installments due without taking into account the amounts spent by them for various works undertaken by them on their respective allotted houses at MIG, Phases II & III, Andhra Pradesh Housing Board (APHB) Colony, Bhimavaram, and for a direction not to levy such penal interest. All the petitioners applied and got allotment of MIG houses in Phases II & III of APHB colony, Bhimavaram. They paid earnest money deposit as well as 20% of the cost of the houses towards ﬁrst installment. After obtaining necessary concurrence from second respondent on their own they took up internal works. They, therefore, contend that when they themselves have incurred money for internal works, penal interest cannot be levied on the delayed payment of installments. Strong reliance is placed by the petitioners on an unreported judgment of this Court in P.S. Karpadi v Vice Chairman cum Housing Commissioner, APHB[1]. Second respondent ﬁled a counter-aﬃdavit. While admitting allotment of houses and the internal works undertaken by the petitioners, in para 4 of the counter- affidavit, they stated as under. As the Petitioners have not paid the quarterly installments (which were ﬁxed after deleting the cost of the works done by the Petitioners at their own costs and the down payments and other amounts paid by them) regularly and in time, they had become liable to pay penal interest as per the terms of the Agreement. Therefore, the levy of penal interest is as per the agreed terms of agreement and is not illegal etc., as stated by the Petitioners. As stated above, the Petitioners have accepted their liability to pay the penal interest and opted to avail the one time settlement scheme and accordingly were given penal interest rebates and have paid the balance amounts due by availing the said beneﬁts. While the First Petitioner was given a penal interest rebate of Rs.27,277/- out of the penal interest payable of Rs.54,555/-, the Second Petitioner was given penal interest rebate @ 50% i.e., amounting to Rs.52,193/- out of the penal interest payable of Rs.1,04,386/-, the third Petitioner was given a penal interest rebate @ 50% i.e., amounting to Rs.52,064-00 out of the penal interest payable of Rs.1,04,128/-, the Fourth Petitioner was given penal interest rebate @ 40% i.e., Rs.48,369/- out of the penal interest payable of Rs.96,738-00 and he was also given 2% incentive of Rs.6,044/- on the ﬁnal cost of the house of Rs.3,02,210-00 after deducting the deleting amount, the ﬁfth Petitioner was given penal interest of 50% amounting to Rs.67,378-00 out of the penal interest of Rs.1,34,736-00 and the sixth petitioner was given penal interest rebate of 40% amounting to Rs.27,723/- out of the penal interest payable of Rs.69,308-00. A reading of the above averments, which have not been speciﬁcally denied by ﬁling reply-aﬃdavit, would show that all the petitioners agreed for one time settlement (OTS). They also agreed, as per OTS, to pay penal interest after availing rebate. Therefore, they cannot blow hot and blow cold and again approach this Court. In said unreported judgment this Court, having noticed that levy of penal interest during pendency of the writ petition in this Court would not be proper, directed the respondents not to levy any penal interest on installments due by the petitioners therein. In the present case, while admitting the writ petition on 05.07.2005, interim stay was granted directing the respondents not to levy any penal interest on the installments due. It is not clear whether the petitioners after accepting OTS paid entire amount with penal interest after availing rebate or still some installments are to be paid. Therefore, if any of the petitioners have to pay any balance installments for the period from 05.07.2005 till date, on such amount penal interest shall not be charged. Except making this observation, the relief as prayed for in this writ petition cannot be granted. The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordingly disposed of. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 25th September, 2008 GHN To 1 The Vice Chairman-Cum- Housing Commissioner, APHB, Gruhakalpa, M.J.Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Executive Engineer, APHB, Tadepalligudem, W.G.District. 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRR} [1] W.P.No.9285 of 2000 dated 31.03.2004