THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17822 of 2011 Dated 07th September, 2011 Between: Ponnam Ashok Goud …Petitioner And The Principal Secretary to Government, Housing Department, A.P.Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S.Bhooma Goud Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Housing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3: Sri M.Brahma Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside proceedings, bearing No.3642/E4/EE(S)/2010, dated 18.12.2010, of respondent No.3, whereby he has called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,01,29,941/- representing the cost of the land at Baghlingampally, after duly deducting the cost of registered land at Saidabad. In the manner in which the writ petition is proposed to be disposed of, it is not necessary to record detailed facts. It would suffice to note that in the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3, it is inter alia stated that after the demand was made under the impugned communication, the petitioner has made a further representation, which was considered in the 518th Board Meeting of the A.P.Housing Board on 04.01.2011 and a resolution was passed in the said Meeting to request the State Government to issue necessary orders to collect balance cost from the petitioner for the land allotted at Baghlingampally, giving credit for the net land taken back at Saidabad Colony (after leaving footpath portion) at the market value of Rs.15,000/- per square yard. Accordingly, letter, dated 20.01.2011, was addressed to the Government. It is further stated that another letter, dated 01.08.2011, was addressed by respondent No.2 to respondent No.1 to clarify the concept of differential rate. Having regard to these subsequent events referred to above, the proceedings impugned in the writ petition have lost their significance. Now that the issue is stated to be pending before the Government of Andhra Pradesh, respondent No.1 is directed to ensure that an appropriate decision is taken on the request of respondent No.2 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision to respondent No.1 and the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.21437 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 07th September, 2011 VGB