THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.29607 OF 2011 ORDER: 1. The Writ Petition is filed questioning the order of the second respondent in Letter No.B/B-21/F3/KD/2008 dated 18.10.2011 directing the husband of the petitioner to vacate the Government Quarter No.B-21/F3, Kaladera Colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad, as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and instructions issued under G.O.Ms.No.248, GAD dated 17.05.1973 from time to time. 2. The brief facts, which are necessary for disposal of this Writ Petition, are as under. Father-in-law of the petitioner, Sri G.Viswanadhan, was allotted a Government Quarter at Panjagutta while he was working as Lab Technician Grade I in A.P. Chest Hospital, Yerragadda. He retired from service on 30.08.2000. While so, her husband G.Sreedhar was appointed as Lab Technician on temporary basis by the orders of the District Collector dated 12.08.1996. According to the instructions issued under G.O.Ms.No.248, GAD dated 17.05.1973 from time to time, the spouse, sons, unmarried daughters and widows of Retired Government Servants are also eligible for allotment of Government Quarters according to their eligibility on out of turn basis, if they are in Government service irrespective of the fact whether their appointment is regular or temporary and if their duty is in Hyderabad. In view of the said G.O., her father-in-law made a request to the respondents to allot a quarter in the name of petitioner’s husband on out of turn basis and accordingly, the respondents allotted the above said quarter in the name of her husband. While so, her husband suffered poly arthritis leading to paralysis of the lower limbs and went on medical leave. As his appointment itself was temporary, the management of State T.B. Center dispensed with his services and the respondents asked him to vacate the quarter. Her husband filed W.P.No.28608 of 2008 seeking directions for continuance in the same quarter and obtained interim directions for continuance. The said Writ Petition was dismissed for default on 16.06.2011 and on an application to recall the ex parte order, on 11.08.2011, this Court granted three months time to vacate the Government quarter. She is working as Technical Officer in State T.B. Center since 13.04.2010 and she is also entitled for Government Quarter and so, made an application for allotment of Government Quarter on her name, which is pending before the respondents. While so, the second respondent is threatening to evict their family from the above said quarter on the ground that this Court granted only three months time and the same is due to expire by 11.11.2011. As already stated, apart from being the wife of G.Sreedhar, the petitioner is also an employee of the State Government Unit and as such, she is entitled to a Quarter in her independent capacity. Her husband made a representation to the respondents on 03.11.2011 stating that he was reappointed in the State T.B. Center, but the said order was cancelled and the same is subject matter in another Writ Petition. Hence, the petitioner requests to keep the order dated 18.10.2011 in abeyance. Challenging the proceedings of the second respondent dated 18.10.2011, the present Writ Petition is filed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as per Clause (9) of G.O.Ms.No.248, GAD dated 17.05.1973, the petitioner is eligible for Government Quarter and therefore, appropriate decision has to be taken by the Government in accordance with law on the representation of petitioner’s husband. 3. The proceedings dated 18.10.2011 reads as follows. “The Government have allotted the Govt. Quarter No.B-21/F3 at Kaladera Colony to one Sri G.Sridhar. As he was found ineligible to get allotment of the Govt. Quarter, eviction orders passed under Section 5 (1) against him. As per the directions of the Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.28608 of 2008, dated 11.08.2011, Sri G.Sridhar, the petitioner is permitted to retain the possession of the Govt. Quarter No.B-21/F3 at Kaladera Colony, Hyderabad, for a period of (3) months from the date of disposal of case i.e., from 11.08.2011 onwards and also ordered that the respondents shall be free to take possession of the Quarter in question after expiry of the (3) months. The possession of the said Govt. Quarter will be taken over soon after expiry of the above said stipulated time. Therefore, Sri G.Sridhar, S/o. Sri Viswanadham, R/o. Govt. Qtr.No.B-21/F3 at Kaladera Colony, Hyderabad, is hereby informed to vacate the Quarter within the stipulated time i.e., on 11.11.2011, without fail, failing which necessary action will be initiated as per the provisions of the APPP (EOUO) Act, 1968.” 4. As seen from the above, it is clear that the said order was passed in pursuance of the directions given by this Court in W.P.No.28608 of 2008 dated 11.08.2011. There is no factual foundation as how that order is illegal or violates the right of the petitioner. Clause (9) of G.O.Ms.No.248, GAD dated 17.05.1973 applicable to regular or temporary Government Servants. Admittedly, the petitioner is a contract employee. Clause (9) of the said G.O. has no application to the case of the petitioner. In the absence of violation or infringement of any statutory or legal right, the question of issuance of Mandamus does not arise. Under Rule 9 (30) of the A.P. Fundamental Rules, a temporary post is defined as a post carrying a definite rate of pay sanctioned for limited one. The contract post of petitioner does not carry any definite rate of pay but carries only consolidated pay of Rs.15,000/-. Therefore, that order cannot be said to be illegal as it is a sequel to the directions given by this Court and hence, the Writ Petition is devoid of merit. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ (K.C.BHANU, J) 10th November 2011 RRB