HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25642 of 2011 Date:14.09.2011 Between: G.Suryanarayana ..... Petitioner AND Government of A.P., Irrigation and CAD (PW) Department Reptd by its Superintendent Engineer, NSLBC O & M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam And three others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarty Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Irrigation and CAD Counsel for Respondent No.3: GP for Revenue Counsel for Respondent No.4: GP for Prohibition and Excise The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in seeking to dispossess the petitioner from the residential quarter bearing No.B-8 of NSP Camp Colony, Tekulapalli, Khammam District, without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner was allotted the quarter referred to above while he was in service as Assistant Engineer on 25.09.2003. The petitioner has retired from service on 30.06.2011. On the request made by the Prohibition and Excise Department, respondent No.3 has addressed letter, dated 03.08.2011, to respondent No.1- Superintending Engineer, NSLBC (O&M) Circle, Khammam, wherein it is stated that Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Khammam and Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Khammam, informed respondent No.3 that due to non-availability of accommodation for Prohibition and Excise Office and Station House Office (Prohibition and Excise), Khammam, much difficulty is being faced. Respondent No.3 has, therefore, directed respondent No.1 to allot quarters bearing Nos.B-8 and C- 22 of NSP Camp Colony, Tekulapalli, Khammam District, for establishment of the above two mentioned offices. Following the said direction, respondent No.1 issued proceedings No.AB/EC.6/Otr/668, dated 05.09.2011, allotting the said two quarters for the above-mentioned purpose. Simultaneously, the Assistant Executive Engineer, NSC Camp Section, Tekulapalli, Khammam District, issued notice dated 05.09.2011, to the petitioner calling upon him to vacate the quarter within seven days and handover the same. The petitioner is stated to have submitted representation, dated 06.09.2011, to respondent No.1, wherein he stated that representations made by some retired employees to the District Collector, Khammam, for allotment of quarters at nominal rate, considering the long service rendered by them by foregoing the HRA and AHRA, are under consideration of the Government, and that the petitioner may not be evicted from the quarter in his occupation till the Government Order is passed. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation appearing for the respondents, I am of the opinion that the petitioner being a retired employee has no right to be in occupation of the quarter which was allotted to him while he was in service. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioner that any scheme has been framed by the Government providing for allotment of the quarters to the retired employees. It is also not the case of the petitioner that before the impugned notice has been issued, he has approached the Government for such allotment. As such, the petitioner cannot plead any legally enforceable right for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to enable him to continue in the quarter in question. As no legal right of the petitioner is infringed, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned notice, except to the extent that as the period of seven days given to the petitioner is too short and inadequate to enable him to make alternative arrangements, he is permitted to remain in possession of quarter No.B-8 till 31.10.2011. The petitioner shall handover vacant possession of the said quarter to the respondents on 01.11.2011, failing which the respondents shall be free to evict him without any notice. Subject to the above directions and observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.31608 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 14th September, 2011 DR