THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No. 17293 OF 1996 Date: 19.12.2006 Between: Aaripaka Viswanatham. … Petitioner and The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and two others. … Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No. 17293 OF 1996 ORDER: Seeking a direction to the respondents to issue “R” cards in favour of the petitioner, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner claims to be a displaced person consequent upon his land being acquired for establishment of the Visakhapatnam Steel Plant. The State Government had taken a policy decision to provide rehabilitation including allotment of individual plots, providing suitable employment etc. In order to identify such displaced persons, identity cards called “R” cards were to be issued. The said “R” card enabled the cardholder to seek employment in the 3rd respondent plant as also to get a plot admeasuring 107 Sq. yards under the Rehabilitation Scheme. Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents, the petitioner herein filed W.P. No. 633 of 1989 for grant of “R” card and this Court, by order dated 07.09.1989, directed the 2nd respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of “R” card the 2nd respondent issued notice dated 23.04.1990 wherein it is stated that the name of the petitioner herein was not found in the electoral rolls and other connected records and as such his case was not considered for being granted “R” card. The 2nd respondent called upon the petitioner to produce any recorded evidence to prove his residence in the village as on the date of acquisition of his land to enable the authorities to consider his case. Sri A. Satya Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioner, would contend that the petitioner had filed an O.P. seeking enhancement of compensation for the land acquired from him and that the same was compromised before the Lokadalat, that a residence certificate was issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer at Gazuwaka, that a study certificate was issued by the Head Master of local school and that in the electoral rolls of 1986 the petitioner’s name finds place. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that, even though there was more than adequate evidence to show that the petitioner was a resident of the village on the date of acquisition of his lands, the impugned notice dated 23.04.1990 was issued only to avoid compliance of the directions of this Court. No counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. Since the relief sought for in the writ petition, is for a direction to the respondents to issue a “R” card in favour of the petitioner and since the objection is that the petitioner herein had not produced any recorded evidence to prove his residence in the village when their land were acquired, the petitioner herein shall furnish necessary proof in this regard by way of a detailed representation within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and the 2nd respondent shall consider his representation and pass appropriate orders thereupon within three months from the date of receipt of the representation. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________________________ Date: 19.12.2006 RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J MRKR