IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 263 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 20/02/2009 in WP No :18941 of 2005 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Sabitha Devi W/o. Sri K. Ashok Babu High Court of Andhra Pradesh R/o. Quarter.No.PJ-39, Panjagutta Colony, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep.by its Secretary, General Administration (Accommodation-B) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Estate Officer Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad & Secunderabad at Khairatabad, Hyderabad. ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:SRI.D.V.SITHARAM MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION The Court made the following : J U D G M E N T (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy): Feeling aggrieved by order dated 20-02-2009, in W.P. No.18914 of 2005, the appellant, an employee of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, filed the present writ appeal. The controversy in the appeal relates to occupation of Government Quarter No. PJ 39 of Panjagutta Officers’ Colony, Hyderabad by the appellant and her husband, who happens to be a serving District Judge. Having regard to the admitted fact that the husband of the appellant, in whose favour the allotment of the said quarter was made, was transferred out of Hyderabad, the learned Single Judge held that the insistence by the respondents on the vacation of the quarter by the appellant and her husband is in conformity with law. Having carefully perused the reasoning of the learned Single Judge contained in the order under appeal, we are entirely in agreement with the same. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the well-reasoned order of the learned Single Judge. Sri D.V.Sitharam Murthy, learned counsel for the appellant, however, submitted that while the appellant is entitled for allotment of quarter of “IS” type and one of the quarters, namely; IS 58, which was allotted to her, having already been realloted to a third party, she is entitled to be considered for allotment of a quarter in terms of Rule 8 (5) (2) of the Allotment of Government Quarters Rules, 1973 (for short “the Rules”). The learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration, candidly, submitted that after the appellant has not availed the opportunity of occupying IS 58 quarter for more than three years, which was kept vacant by the Government to enable her to occupy the same, and that therefore, the said quarter was reallotted to a third party. He, however, submitted that if the appellant makes an application for allotment of an appropriate quarter, according to her eligibility, the respondents would certainly consider the same, depending upon the vacancy position. In our considered view, Rule 8 (5) (2) of the Rules was given effect to by allotting the alternative quarter to the appellant and it is a matter of record that the appellant failed to occupy the same on various grounds, which are personal to her and her husband. It cannot, therefore, be said that the respondents have violated Rule 8 (5) (2) of the Rules. Therefore, the appellant cannot be permitted to continue to occupy Quarter No. PJ 39. Accordingly, she is given six (6) weeks’ time from today to vacate the said quarter. However, as and when the appellant makes an application for allotment of alternative quarter, according to her eligibility, the respondents shall consider and decide the same, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of making such application. It is made clear that if the appellant fails to vacate the quarter, within the above-stipulated time, the respondents shall be at liberty to act in accordance with law. Subject to the above, the writ appeal is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main appeal, WAMP No.543 of 2009 filed by the appellant for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. T. MEENA KUMARI, J Dated 3rd March, 2009 C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J vrn