THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.26406 of 2014 Between:
Dated 18th December, 2014 Chintala Ganapathi Rao and others And …Petitioners The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government, Irrigation & CAD Department, A.P.Secretariat, Hyderabad – 500 022 and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Ms.K.V.Rajasree Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Irrigation & CAD The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in taking further steps based on letter bearing No.100 ENC/AB/EC.1, dated 13.03.2013, of respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary.
Though time was taken by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation & CAD on three occasions, no counter affidavit is filed.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the petitioners are the permanent employees of Irrigation Department and that petitioner No.1 is in occupation of Quarter bearing Door No.28-2 since 2003 and petitioner No.2 of Quarter bearing Door No.29-3 since 1998. That these quarters, which were constructed at the time of construction of Nagarjuna Sagar Dam, were under the control of the PWD Department and that respondent No.1 has issued G.O.Ms.No.61/1, Irrigation & CAD (PW.NSP.1) Department, dated 03.07.2004, under which the quarters are permitted to be sold in favour of the persons, who are in occupation for more than one year prior to the date of sale at nominal cost basis.
It is further stated that the petitioners have earlier filed W.P.No.981 of 2008 for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not finalising the proposals submitted to the Government for allotment of dilapidated quarters in occupation of the petitioners in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.61/1, dated 03.07.2004, and that based on the instructions reported by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation that the proposals were already submitted to the Secretary to respondent No.1 and that they are under examination at Government level, the writ petition was closed with a direction to respondent No.1 to take appropriate decision within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
After a lull for about five years, respondent No.2 has addressed the above-mentioned letter to the Engineer-in-chief, Medium Irrigation, I & CAD Department, Jalasoudha Buildings, Errumanzil, Hyderabad, wherein he has informed the latter that himself, Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Parvathipuram and Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation Sub Division, Parvathipuram have inspected the site of dilapidated quarters at Belagam, Parvathipuram Town and found that they are not useful for the department and also not required for Irrigation Offices purpose. He has, therefore, recommended for allotment of the quarters to the petitioners herein who are stated to be residing since 2003 and 1998 respectively duly attending to the repairs on their own as and when required. He has also conveyed his no objection for allotment of the two quarters at nominal cost basis as admissible as per G.O.Ms.No.61/1, dated 03.07.2014. As no further steps have been taken, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.
In my opinion, the inaction of respondent No.1 in acting on the petitioners’ request has forced them to approach this Court twice. Though a direction was issued in the earlier writ petition to respondent No.1 to take a decision on the petitioners’ request for sale of the quarters, no action has been taken by the said respondent. At least, when respondent No.2 has submitted his report to Engineer-in-Chief four years thereafter, no further action was taken. Respondent No.1 is therefore directed to sell the quarters to the petitioners as per G.O.Ms.No.61/1, dated 03.07.2004, as recommended by respondent No.2 vide his letter, dated 13.03.2013, referred to above. Respondent No.1 shall inform the petitioners of the nominal cost of these quarters within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by stipulating time limit for payment of the said amount. If the petitioners pay the amount as determined by respondent No.1 within the stipulated time, respondent No.1 shall ensure that the quarters are registered in favour of the petitioners.
The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.33035 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 18th December, 2014
VGB