IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13136 of 2000 Between: V.Peeyoush Kumar and another ..... PETITIONER AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. By its Principal Secretary to Revenue and seven others .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.C.HANUMANTHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR O.MANOHAR REDDY The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorari to quash proceedings dated 24-02-1987 of respondent No.3 and consequent proceedings issued under Sections 9, 10(1) and 10(3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and proceedings dated 10- 12-1996 of respondent No.1, whereby the application of the petitioners for exemption has been rejected. At the hearing, Sri C.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, fairly submitted that the petitioners are interested in seeking their application for exemption disposed of in accordance with law and in that view of the matter, they are not pressing the first part of the prayer. In view of the same, I proceed to consider the latter portion of the prayer by which the petitioners are seeking quashing of proceedings dated 10-12-1996, by which respondent No.1 rejected the petitioners’ application for exemption. A perusal of the said proceedings shows that while rejecting the petitioners’ application, respondent No.1 has not given any reasons except stating that it has examined the matter in consultation with the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad and observed that the request of the petitioners does not deserve any consideration. In my considered view, respondent No.1 is bound to give reasons for rejecting the application and this view of mine is supported by at least two judgments of this Court in Secunderabad Wholesale Cloth Merchants Association (Registered under the Societies Registration Act) represented by its President Mr Soma Venkateswara Rao vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh[1] and APSRTC Staff Cooperative Housing Construction Society Limited, Vijayawada vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (UC-I) Department and others[2]. Following the same, the writ petition is allowed in part. Proceedings dated 10-12-1996 of respondent No.1 are quashed. Respondent No.1 is directed to reconsider the application of the petitioners for exemption, in the light of the contents of their application and in accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners are permitted to file additional material, if any, within a period of four (4) weeks from today before respondent No.1. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 28th July, 2008 vrn [1] 1987 (2) ALT 957 [2] 2007 (4) ALT 521