IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 16025 of 2007 Between: 1 The Chief Postmaster-General , AP Circle, Dak Sadan Abids, Hyderabad 2 The Director of Accounts (Postal), AP Circle, Dak Sadan Abids, Hyderabad 3 The Chief Executive officer, CGEWHO, 8th floor, "A"wing, Janapath Bhavan, New Delhi ..... PETITIONERS AND Sri T.Mahadev Singh S/o.T.Nagmal Singh o/o. The Director of Accounts (Postal), AP Circle Dak Sadan, Abids, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT 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 issue order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to order dated 25.1.2007 in OA.No.634 of 2005 on the ﬁle of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, and pass such order or orders as the Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) Counsel for the Respondent : MR.SANKA RAMAKRISHANA RAO The Court made the following : ORDER :: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.16025 of 2007 ORDER : ( per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed ) This writ petition is ﬁled against the order dated 25- 01-2007 passed in OA No.634 of 2005 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. The applicant-respondent herein ﬁled the said OA No.634 of 2005 challenging the Memo dated 17-5-2005 passed by the petitioners 1 and 2 herein rejecting the request of the applicant for reduction in House Building Advance interest, reimbursement of 2.5 % rebate on interest on House Building Advance and 0.5 % rebate on interest for observing small family norms by the applicant. 3. The facts stated are the applicant-respondent herein while working as Senior Accountant in the petitioners- department had applied for acquisition of type ‘B’ ﬂat from the Central Government Employees Welfare Housing Organization, New Delhi, in their Phase II Housing Scheme at Gachi Bowli, Hyderabad, under the self ﬁnancing scheme to Central Government Employees. The applicant was accordingly allotted type ‘B’ ﬂat in the said venture at a tentative cost of Rs.6.9 lacs and accordingly the applicant was sanctioned house building advance to the tune of Rs.3,21,860/- on 26-12-2001. Out of Rs.3,21,860/- a sum of Rs.1,44,838/- was remitted to the CEO, CGEWHO, New Delhi, by the department and accordingly, recovery of House Building Advance principal @ Rs.2,660/- per month was made from 6/2003 to 8/2004 amounting to Rs.39,900/- from the salary of the applicant. But it is stated that before the release of the 2nd instalment of Rs.72,419/-, the applicant made a representation dated 9-6-2004 to the CEO, CGEWHO, New Delhi, for cancellation of allotment of ﬂat as his ﬁnancial position would not permit him to acquire the ﬂat. It is stated that his request was considered and the amount of Rs.1,44,838/- was refunded by the CGEWHO, New Delhi, to the petitioners-Department. It is further the case of the applicant that the interest on the amount of Rs.1,44,838/- @ 12.5 % is bad as the sanctioned amount is less than Rs.1.5 lacs. He has also requested to treat his case as a special case and set aside the order of recovery of 2.5 % extra. The applicant also sought for permissible rebate of 0.5 % for adopting small family norms. 4. By the impugned order, the Tribunal having regard to the compilation of House Building Advance Rules observed that the applicant is not entitled to seek for the reduction of rate of interest from 12.5 % to 8 %, as from 25-11- 1985 uniform rates of interest have been introduced and the applicant’s case is covered by the said rates. It was also observed that as the house was not completed, the applicant was also not allowed for the 0.5 % rebate for adopting small family norms. The Tribunal, however, held that the applicant cannot be charged with interest @ 2.5 % extra in view of oﬃcial memo issued by Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, but as recovery has been done @ 12.5 % interest, the amount of excess recovery made was directed to be refunded with simple interest of 5 % on it. 5. Heard learned Asst. Solicitor General of India and the learned counsel for the applicant. Perused the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. 6. The Tribunal considering the fact that prior to 25- 11-1985, the rate of interest was based on slab basis and admittedly the applicant entered into an agreement with the petitioners herein for release of House Building Advance rightly observed that the applicant cannot ask for change of terms, however, the Tribunal allowed the relied sought for the by the applicant only to the extent of additional 2.5 % interest charged on the house building advance amount, which in the facts and circumstances of the case does don warranty any interference by this Court. 7. In the circumstances, the writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed conﬁrming the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. No order as to costs. ______________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J ____________________ G. Bhavani Prasad, J Dated: 22nd September, 2008 Nrg. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}