IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 18888 of 2000 Between: 1 Smt.Laxminarsamma W/o Laxmappa LIGH, Quarter No.10, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 2 Smt. Revamma W/o Late Siddiramappa, LIGH Quarter No.8, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District-AP. 3 B.S.Prabhakar S/o Late B.Samuel LIGH, Quarter No.4, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 4 Smt. L.K.Deevanamma (died) per LRs 10to12 W/o Rathnaiah, LIGH, Quarter No.7, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 5 M.Ramaiah S/o Laxmaiah, LIGH, Quarter No.11, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 6 Smt.Mariamma W/o K.Prasad Babu, LIGH, Quarter No.12, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 7 B.Sudarshan S/o B.David, LIGH, Quarter No.1, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 8 Syed Taher Hussain S/o Syed Sayab Hussain LIGH, Quarter No.3, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 9 C.Shobha D/o C.C.Sharma, LIGH, Quarter No.2, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. 10 N. Varadhayani W/o. Asif Khan Flat No.8, Building No.1003, Railway Quarters, Chilkalaguda, Secunderabad 11 Vanitha Vathsala W/o. Premkumar Singh Thakur 6-6-417, Opp: Shakthi Ganapathi Temple, New Boiguda, Musheerabad, Secunderabad 12 Mercy Vasantha W/o. Srinivas LIGH, Quarter No.7, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District- AP. Petitioners 10to12 brought on record as LRs of deceased 4th petitioner as per C.O.dt.3-8-2007 in WPMP 19309/2007 ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Housing, Rep. by its Secretary. Muncipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Mahabubnagar District, Mahabubnagar -AP. 3 The Executive Engineer, (R&B) Division, Mahabubnagar. .....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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the Proceedings No.C2/3488/96-2K dt. 18-07-2000 of the 3rd Respondent as arbitrary, illegal and void and consequentially direct the Respondents to allot the Low Income Group Houses (LIGH) Nos.1 to 4,7,8 and 10 to 12 at Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District on hire purchase basis to the Petitioners in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.56 dt. 20-10-1989 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.NARENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The relief sought for by the petitioners in this writ petition is to declare the proceedings of the third respondent dated 18-07-2000 as arbitrary and illegal and to consequently direct the respondents to allot the Lower Income Group Houses (LIGH) at Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District, on hire purchase to the petitioners in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.56 dated 20-10-1989. In the proceedings dated 18-07-2000 the Executive Engineer, Mahabubnagar informed the petitioners that the policy of the Government was to retain the quarters for occupation by the Government Servants in service for residential accommodation on rental basis but not for sale either on out right basis or on hire purchase system. The petitioners were asked to vacate the quarters within a month from the date of receipt of the notice, failing which eviction proceedings would be initiated against them to vacate the quarters as per the rules in force. Sri M.Narender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, would draw attention of this Court to G.O.Ms.No.56, Housing, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department dated 20-10-1989, whereunder the Government had decided to allot houses on hire purchase basis to all the persons who were in occupation prior to October, 1986 as a special case as per the prescribed guidelines. Learned counsel would also refer to a judgment of this Court in W.P.No.9636 of 1996 dated 11-11- 1999 to contend that, in similar circumstances, this Court had directed the respondents to allot houses on hire purchase basis at the original market value and not at current market prices. A counter-aﬃdavit is ﬁled by the third respondent wherein it is stated that the said GO has no application since they relate to houses constructed by municipalities whereas LIGH quarters in question at Narayanpet and Jadcherla were constructed by the City Improvement Board in the year 1958 and was handed over to the Roads and Buildings Department on 17-06-1966. G.O.Ms.No.56, on which reliance is placed, refers to houses constructed by Municipalities. In the absence of a counter-aﬃdavit being ﬁled either by the Government, or by the District Collector, it is not possible to ascertain whether the said GO would apply to the quarters occupied by the petitioners herein. Whether the houses under their occupation should be sold to the petitioners on hire purchase basis are matters of policy for the Government to decide and not for this Court to determine. Since no counter-aﬃdavit is ﬁled either by the ﬁrst respondent or the second respondent, the only relief which can be granted is to direct the Secretary, Housing, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, (ﬁrst respondent herein) to examine the petitioners claim for being sold the quarters on hire purchase basis in terms of G.O.Ms.No.56 dated 28-10-1981 and to take an appropriate decision thereupon, including whether the said GO is applicable to them, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The ﬁrst respondent shall, after examining the matter in detail, pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioners who are in occupation of the quarters. In view of the interim orders passed, the petitioners have remained in occupation even during the pendency of the writ petition. It is but appropriate that they be permitted to continue to occupy the quarters undisturbed till a ﬁnal decision is taken in this regard by the first respondent and the decision is communicated to them. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _______________ 28th August, 2008 SKM