THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 27114 OF 2009 ORDER : 1. This Writ Petition is ﬁled seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing letters dated 25.11.2009 to members of petitioner society and further directing them to submit willingness by 11.12.2009 agreeing to pay cost as per payment schedule mentioned in the above letter as illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same. 2. Case of the petitioner may be stated as follows: Petitioner is a registered society formed with an object of looking after welfare of its members. It has more than 500 members, who are all lower income group (LIG) people. Paper notiﬁcation was issued inviting applications from poor people and Phase IV of KPHB for purchase of LIG plots and as per the notiﬁcation dated 6.12.2004, members of petitioner society made applications for allotment of houses paying the initial payment of Rs.2,500/-. After lapse of long period, they received eligibility letters as they were selected in lottery conducted on 7.6.2005. Though construction of houses was completed within the stipulated time and they were delivered to the allottees in other areas, allotment of ﬂats is not completed to IV phase KPHB colony allottees i.e. members of petitioner society. Inspite of representations from them, the authorities have not completed the construction of houses. But, all of sudden, the fourth respondent issued impugned letters to the members of petitioner society informing that since the demand is heavy, the board prepared the scheme for construction of 750 ﬂats, and that the tentative cost of each ﬂat including cost of undivided share of land on ownership arrived at Rs.8,50,000/-, and directing the members to pay the tentative cost as mentioned in the table, and further directing to submit willingness by 11.12.2009 to the fourth respondent for allotment of LIG ﬂats under Phase IV, Venture-II, K.P.H.B. Colony. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. The respondents 2 to 4 ﬁled counter aﬃdavit stating that in view of increase in the cost of building material, labour, etc., revised estimates were prepared and the tentative cost was revised and the same was published in news paper, and that in view of the good response and demand, it was proposed to increase number of ﬂats to be constructed from 500 to 750. In view of various reasons such as increase in plinth area, change of design, increase in the cost of building materials, labour, etc. fresh estimates were submitted and tentative cost was also increased and the cost includes cost of undivided share in the land. The second respondent board works on ‘no proﬁt and no loss’ basis and while ﬁxing rates of ﬂats, it does not add any proﬁt. If the applicants do not want to continue in the scheme as per tentative cost, design, conditions, etc. they can withdraw from the scheme and take back their EMDs. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that initially cost of a ﬂat was Rs.1,50,000/- and thereafter it was increased to Rs.8,50,000/- without there being any proper reasons, and therefore she prays to quash the letters impugned. 5. On the other hand, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4 contended that at the time of issuance of notiﬁcation for allotment, the scheme was diﬀerent as at that time, value of the land was not included in the ﬂat; that as there was no proper response, the scheme was changed and the cost of land has been taken into consideration and therefore the tentative cost was arrived at Rs.8,50,000/- and that the cost of the ﬂat may increase due to escalation of prices of construction material as a period of two years has elapsed from the date of ﬁling of this Writ Petition, and so the tentative cost has to be modified again by the respondents 2 to 4. 6. The factual matrix is in dispute. Originally, the scheme was to lease the land by making constructions and thereafter as there was no response, the scheme was altered so as to include undivided share of the land in the cost of the ﬂat so that the allottee gets a right in respect of the undivided land instead of lease. The project has not been grounded immediately after the notification. Basing on the SSR rates as on the date of notiﬁcation, tentative cost of the ﬂat was arrived at without including the cost of the land. After lapse of two years, there is possibility of increase in the cost of construction material. Therefore, the petitioners can be given a reasonable time even if the respondents 2 to 4 again modiﬁed the cost of the ﬂat in allotment of LIG under Phase-IV basing on the SSR rates. 7. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of directing the respondents 2 to 4 that if there is any increase in the cost of the ﬂats, they can as well give a fresh schedule to the members of petitioner society and a reasonable time shall be granted to them to make available funds for the purpose of payment for purchasing the ﬂats. No costs. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 15.11.2011 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 27114 OF 2009 15.11.2011 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 27114 OF 2009 DATED 15.11.2011 Between: Lower Income Group Housing Allottees Welfare Association & another …Petitioners And The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Housing Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad rep. by its Chief Secretary & others …Respondents