Smt. Gampa Rama Devi v. PETITIONERY

Order

Heard Sri W.B.Srinivas, learned senior designated counsel representing Sri K.Ramalingeswara Sarma, tearned counset appearing on behalf of the petitioner on record and Sri Chittam Buchi Reddy, learned standing counsel for Housing Board, appearing on behalf of the respondents,

2. The tioner aooroached the C urt seekino D raver o as under: "...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction; more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Proceedings of the 1st respondent Lr. herein 231/MIG IIlKMNR/E3lEE/wg1120761468, dated t7.O9.2016 as arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to conclude the allotment made in favour of the petitioner by accepting the balance amount of Rs. l, 57 , 250/- towards the Quarter MIG-II-231 at Karimnagar Near Old Power House, Karimnagar forthwith in the interest of justice... " No. Tha .rca 3 avermen made bv the Detitioner in the affidavit bv the rral'itirl ft ha r f ,G I h rit etitio u nder: I 4 he Erstwhile Ap rent of 70o/o of ;es for allotment rouse allotment rtitioner applied c.259/MIG-I at 0olo of the cost

It is specific case of the petitioner that Housing Board had taken up construction of hor to the needy persons in Karimnagar and the r for the house in 19Bg by making an initial payr the cost of the house. petitioner was issued the letter on 31.10.1997 for the house bearing tr Karimnagar. Subsequenfly, the petitioner paid . of the house on 16.12.1997. However, the respcr dents cancelled the allotment order vide proceedings dated Nil 2_lggg on the ground of non conclusion of the lease cum sir : deed by the petitioner. Against the said proceedings, the petitioner had preferred W.p.No.B421 of 2000 and this court w.: aside the proceedings dated Ni|.12.1999 anc r6spondents to allot the house to the petition: further the case of the petitioner that the p,r representation to the respondents to allot the hct by this court in W.p.No.8421 of 2OOO, hor respondent issued Lr.No.23UMrG.rrlKMNR/E3 /EE/wgt/20t6/468, 17.09.2076 demanding the payment of Rs.24,3Sr, lOOl_ instead of Rs.2,09,600/- as per the original allotment or::r. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred the present writ r:tition. ordered the ' herein. It is titioner made ever the 1tt pleased to set se as directed proceeding:; 5

4. PERUSED THE RECORD: A e The intcrim nrr{arc n ranted favrnI I r af n r 2 18 .A.No. 1 in W.P .No.9161 of 2018 in favour of the Detitioner whi ch are ln rce as on date is extracted hereu nder: - Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Housing Board, the 2nd respondent, this Court is satisfied that suFflcient case is made out for granting interim order. Accordingly, there shall be a direction to maintain status quo and not to allot the subject Quarter bearing No.MIG-II-231 situated near Old Power House, Karimnagar, to any other third party, pending final disposal of the writ petition. The Lr.No.23 1 order. B MG .II KM NR^/E3./E E wo t20 61193- dated 2 o4.2016 to the Detitioner is extracted issued bv the 1st resDondent hereu der:- With reference to the above cited, it is to inform that the House No.231 MIG.II at A.P Housing Board colony, Near Old Power House, Karimnagar is allotted to you. Hence, it is requested to pay an amount of Rs.24.39.000-00 towards cost of the House bearing No.231 MIG.II situated at A.P Housing Board colony, Near Old Power House, Karimnagar, The total amount has to be paid within one month from this date of receipt of the lefter. After payment of the total amount the house will be registered on your name and handed over to you. This is for favour of kind information please 6 M T o r u e N 3 E 2 1 4 8 the 1't res the oeti to i le Lr.No.231 t:d 17.09.2016 g er is extracted hereunder:- ^^1,-i:.,1,n1o1T lhat your-request can not be c, sidered for finat cost of Rs.2,0e,600_00 or Mic.rr H;r;;-G;:; at Karimnasar cotony, as desired in the refereni" i;-iiill. : rrther the same has already been informed to you ,iOu ."fJiu-r:e 1,t and 2nd cited. However a copies of tetter'is;;il;'f";_ rady reference D T e ev n n f e r t o o4 2 5 a inW 2 of ! Court, ated | ) is extracted hereunder:-

14. It is further seen that thouqh a new oeri, for.. allorment, before finalizins-ih" .";tI;,. willingness to pay the balance;'."r"t *", rne respondent Board. In all fairness, tne ie; "ir. Board ought to have stopped f.orn p.oi""Oing n to the- new person to consider td" ."q*.i , Thus, fair procedure was not followed. ii;;"; dealing. with allottees was not observed. Th I res_pondent Board was illegal, and arbitrarv. i enforcement of terms oi .ont.i.i uri'i,"ir,, established proceduraI formatities b;i;;"il; 15. Howev^er, the person who was identified ir paper norification, dated O2.O2.2OOO, *"i ufLti= !1._1utiti".^were compteted and i"f"rrn"J- 5ranotng Counsel, the said pe.son is in- I enJoyment of the said property. The said rr respondent in the writ petition. Havino reoai.l'r no otrection can be issued to tfre sec"onO -reso I the Housing Board to allot the ,;;" ;;;;; ;i;, 16 .Thus, while setting aside the order imouc r petition, the responde-nt Housinf B;;;; ;; ,uL., any other alternative house available for : "J n was ldentified the petitioner,s rdy in receipt by ondent Housing th the allotment the petitioner. rlished norms in , the action of s not a case of : in observing ena I action. )ursuant to the I the house and ry the learned ossession and rson is not a ) the said fact, rdent, wh ich is petitioner. ed in the writ :ed to provide Jch allotment 7 immediately or in the near future subject to fulfilment of all the required formalitles for such allotment. d n n d s e t a I t Detitioner in su DOrt of the ition nd in oarticu lar oar Nos. to8a re extracted hereund er: -

5. I respectfully submit that the Allotment of the subject house was made to the Petitioner in the year 2016 pursuant to the Order, dated 08-04-2015 in W'P' No' 8421 of 2000 directing the Housing Board to provide any other alternative house available for such allotment or in the near future subject to fulfillment of all the required formalities of such allotment. There was no direction that such allotment should be made by fixing any old rate' In compliance with the said Order of this Hon'ble High Court' the Housing Board allotted MIG-II House No' 231, in Phase-I, at Housing Board Colony, Karimnagar, which was ava ilable/vacant to the Petitioner vide Allotment Letter dated 23-04-2016 by fixing the cost of the same @ Rs' 24,31,OOO/- as per the then prevailing market value' I respectfully submit that as per Regulation No' 28 of the Telangana- Housing Board (Allotment, Management and "of nIG, MIG, LIG and EWS Houses of Flats) Sale Regulations, 1997 , in case of houses remaining un-allotted Allotments were cancelled for default of payment of installments or dues or for any other reason, in areas other than the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad, shall be allotted on first-come-first-served basis' The cost of such houses would be fixed as on the date of such allotment. In the present case in view of the direction of this Hon'ble High Court in W.P. No. 8421 of 2000, dated 08-04-2015, the available vacant house was allotted to the Petitioner by fixing its cost as on the date of the allotment' -whose

6. I respectfully submit that, if at all, the Petitioner ought to have filed a Contempt Case in W.P. No. 8421 of 2000 or a Review Petition or Writ Appeal against the same and ., "hand filing of the present.Writ petition is not maintainable. In fact, the petitioner had got i.ir"J u'i oni"rp, Notice, dated 06-03-2017, th.roug6 nu. nOuo.It, liu,,ng thar rhe cost of the house allotted to f,er. snouiJ-l ,-nruO u, the old rate to which the First Respond"ni ir.i ed Repty, OateO 1.7-03-2017. Thereafter, the petitionei-' l-JO tn. present Writ petition instead oi riting Cont".ip, Cl1" o. Review petition or writ Appear. .r ."ip".trriiv'-,ii,ilt that as no Review petition or writ nppeai;;; ;it";i irre oroe. oateo 08-04-2015 in W.p. N9. jOOO n., O"Ior. rinat. By filing the present Writ petition, the-peir lil. ,, virtualty _8a21 "r seeking for a review or appeal or modif ( ition of the said Order which is not oermissible. If the p; iiiln". is of the lgin1o1^lnat as per the order, dated ot. j+Izors in w.p. No. 8421 of 2000, the Housint i;; ;;'ro ailot the house to her at the old rate pi"r"ifi"J i" '662, ,n" n". to -ietition file contempt case and firing r.ein'wi i is not maintainable. If on the other tne-ri :iiiJner is of the opinion that the Order.. dated OA-Oa_-rO1!' n'ti.o. No. e+Zr .2000 does not dtreit that tne attotment shluld be at the otd rate, she shoutd have fited R;;i;'o"iit,o. or writ Appeal and the present Writ petition i.-r,, ,iuintrinable in any view of the matter. 7. I r-espectfully submit, secondly and rlternately, that 9ye1 if the cost of the house ailotted t" n" petitioner in 2016 is fixed at the same rate as fixed oithe Allottees who were altotted the houses in in" vJJ. iggi, tn" .r." w-ould be payabte by the petitionli * t i-i-na"r.rt from 1.997. The Allotments were made in the ) ear 1997 under Hire-Purchase Scheme.. rnererore,- ei :,i' the other Allottees, the Sate Deeds of .or" o-i *;; ;'were rited by the Peritioner, had paid olty th;;;*"' ii ,r""t (30olo of the tentative cost) and entered into Agi: iment anO toot< possession of the houses and paid tnu-f, ini" TOoh cost (including enhanced cost, if any, on iirli on-of the final i1 qr"rarterty.instatments tie qrii, ."ty'instatments ::r,)^ r.e., over 12 years) and. each instalment , mount includes interest and incidental charges. nritnui,',r' iui"in puy."nt of the instalment would. att-ract p"""i il,i. luJt. rn.r"for", even if the cost of the house aliotted to rre- i"1;1,onu. .n the year 2016 was fixed at tne same-ral, ,] ii,.eo for the allo.ttees who were ailotted in the yeaiiS))'ana interest and incidental charges are added u. i.po= rO Jn tne otne. 9 allottees who were allotted in the year 1997, the amount due from the Petitioner would come to around the same cost as was fixed for the house allotted to the Petitioner in the year 2016. B. I respectfully submit that as per G.O. Ms. No. 522, Revenue (UU) Department, dated 2O-07-L988, the Stamp Duty on the Sale Deeds executed by the Housing Board is to be calculated only on the Final Cost of the concerned house fixed by the Housing Board. Therefore, though the actual amount paid by the Allottees to the Housing Board includes the Final Cost + Interest and Incidental Charges paid over a period of 12 years (and more in cases of delay in payment of the installments), the Final Cost only is shown as the Sale Price in the Sale Deeds and Stamp Duty is paid on the Final Cost only and not on the interest and incidental charges paid by the allottee to the Housing Board over the period of 12 years or more and even though the market value of the said house as on the date of registration would be much higher. Therefore, on the basis of the Sale Price mentioned in the Sale Deeds executed by the Housing Board, the Petitioner cannot contend that the allottees/purchasers under the same had paid only the sale price mentioned in the Sale Deeds to the Housing Board. In fact, the actual amount paid by the allottees to the Housing Board would be much more than the final cost mentioned in the Sale Deeds. DISCUSSI ON AND CONCLUSION:- 5 The learned counsel oDeartno n behalf f the Detiti ner mainlv outs-forth the followi o submissi ons tn SUDDort of the itaoner ase:- The order impugned vide Lr.No.231 i) Mrc.rrl KMN R / E3 t EE t W gl I 2oL6 I 46A, dated t7.o9 -2ot6 10 issued by the l.t respondent is arbitrary, llegat, without application of mind and contrary to law. ii) The order impugned, dated 17.09.201( passed by the l"t respondent is bereft of reasons. iii) The order impugned, dated 1,Z.Og.2}tti passed by the 1"t respondent is contrary to the specific di ections issued by this Court in favour of the petitione. herein, dated 08.04.2015 passed in W.p.No.g421 of 2OO0. iv) The reasons put_forth by the resJx.ndents in the counter affidavit filed by the 1st responderr in June_201g and aiso in December, 2C.24 do not in fa :t answer the specafac pleas put-forth by the petitaoner i r the affidavit filed by the petataoner in support of th: present writ petition nor the pteas put_forth by the pr: itioner in the additional affidavit fited by the petitioner orr 3O.11.2O21. v) The fact that the petitioner was one c,t the applicant in the year lggg and was 31.10.1992 for the house Karimnagar phase-fu had been totally ignc -ed by the 1st respondent. issued allotnr, Int letter, bearing No.: 59lMIG_I 11 vi) The fact that the petitioner paid 2oolo of the cost of the house/quarter to the respondents on 15.12.1997 itself is not disputed even by the respondents herein. vii) The plea of the respondents in the counter and additional counter affidavit that the petitioner was atlotted quarter in the year 2O16 and therefore, there is justification in demanding Rs.24,39,OOO/- is not reasonable and is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law Based on the afo said submissions made bv the learne counsel aooearino on behalf of the oetitioner, t he re t r itioner in the resent writ oetition. 6 Learned stan dino counsel ooearino on beh lf of the resoondents made in the counter a davit and ad ditional r on beha h u he follo n mts ro i) During local enquiry conducted in the year 2O16, having exercised the power under Section-13A of the Housing Board Act, 1956, the competent Authority fixed the cost of the house allotted to the petitioner herein as I I I ,] i I i I I t I t2 per the prevailing market value duri rg ZOL6 i.e., RS.24,39,OO0./-. Therefore, the said cos,: fixed for said quarter is reasonable, in accordance to lart . ii) The respondent Housing Board comple ted its scheme by securing the financial assistance fror n HUDCO and repaid the loan to HUDCO along with flr : interest and other charges and hence, the interest, inr:i ientar charges and penal interest on the outstanding instatments had been collected from other altottees of tf.r said scheme. Therefore, there is no illegality in the or ler impugned, dated 17.09.2016 issued by the 1"t resp lndent, nor is there any iilegarity in fixing the cost of subject house allofted to the petitioner as per the pre:,,ailing market value during 2O16 locat enguiry. Hence, flr : said amount of Rs.24,39,OOO/- is permissible and legal and the order impugned warrants no interference by this ( ourt. iii) The remedy of the petitioner is t. fire a review petation or a writ appeal and the present ri ,rit petition is not maintaanable since the order of thir; Court, dated 08.04.2015, passed in W.p.No.g42l- ol 2OO ) in favour of the petitioner, does not indicate any di r :ction to the respondent Housing Board to allot, the subiect quarter at the old rate. Therefore, the present writ petition filed by the petitioner needs to be dismissed. Bas don the abo afores a d sub mt stons made bv the learned standino counse! aoDeaiin o on beh lf of etitaoner is not e titled for the sDonde nts. the as r edf n petition.

7. A bare perusal of the record in particular para No'16 of the order of this Court dated 08.O4.2O15 passed in W.P.No.8421 of 2OOO, clearly indicates that the respondent Housing Board was specifically directed to proVide any other alternative house available for such altotment immediately or in the near future subject to fulfilment of all the required formalities for such allotment.

8. A bare perusal of the record further indicates that the petitioner challenged the cancellation of allotment made in favour of the petitioner without any prior notice to the petitioner by filing W.P.No.8421 of 2OOO, this Court T i I i I I l I 14 allowed the said writ petition vide i1:: order, dated 08.04.201S and made certaan observatic,t s in favour of the petitioner, which are as under:_ a) No prior notice was issued to the petit oner b) Even prior to confirmation of : rncellation of allotment on 27.O4.2OO0, the responcent Board had unirateraily cafled off apprication f(]r arotment of said quarter by issuing re_auction I otification o2.o2.2000 and thereafter, the saiil quarter allotted to one Smt. Bhagya Lakshmi rnd the same indicates the pre determined apt, oach of the respondent Board in cancelling the ali )tment made in favour of the petitioner vide allc tment letter dated 3 1. 10 .tgg7 .

9.7 hisCourt llowi no fa s n DErusal of record ke! as bo ne on reco r a) No further communication was iss .red by the respondents after the issuance of all< tment tetter on 31.10.1997, informing the petitior er, that the subject quarter was ready for occuparr y. b) The lst respondent faired to imprem.r t the order obtained in favour of the petitioner o, og.o4.2015 15 in W.P.No.842L ot 2OOO in its true spirit and the same attained its finality. c) The petitioner made representataons, dated 03.09.2016 & 25.11.2016 to the respondent No.2 herein to reconsider the subject issue and the same was again rejected vide the impugned proceedings Lr.No.231 MIG.IIlKMNR'IE3/EElwgll2Ot6/464, dated 17.O9.2016 of the 1"t respondent herein by simply stating that the petitioner's request cannot be considered for final cost of Rs.2,O9,60O/- of MIG.II House No.231 at Karimnagar colony as desired by the petitioner and the same was informed to the petitioner vide letter, dated 23.0,4-2016 & ' 16.07.2016. d) As per the latest sale deed for the extent of plot area measurlng 252.77 Sq.Yds., and a Plinth Area of 594 Sq.Ft, the total sale consideration of the house is Rs.2rO9,5OO-OO only, the said amounts are indicated in the sale deed executed by the respondent Housing Board, the sale deed, dated |7.O5-2OL7, executed in favour of the Sri Syed Saleemuddin, indicates that the cost of the quarter would be Rs.2,O9,6OOl- lor j I 16 at Telangan the house bearing No.g4, MIG_l;. Housing Board Colony, Near Power House, Karimnagar. The sale deed, dalr d OS.08.2022 executed by the respondent Housing lroard in favour of Sri Nazeer Ahmed reflects that th3 total cost of quarter is Rs.2,09,6O0/- for the trouse bearing No.s2, MIG-II at Tetangana Housing Board Cotony, Near Old power House, Karimnagar. .l.l is Court takes note of the fact as borne on record t rat petitioner had been discriminated, since ar amount of Rs.24,39,OOO/- is being demanc ed by the respondent Housing Board for ailotme r t of the same extent of quarter, when sale deeds executed an favour of other individuals by the L t respondent andicate an amount of Rs.2,O9,6OO/_ or ly in the year 2005, 2O11 and 2016. e) t ev d t ,lian ce tothe orders of this Court. dated Og.O4.2C,_ 5 oassed an I P o 42 2 en ti s d o n r r r( n e to the rl 12.t2.2016. I letter, dated

23.O4. o -Ce m d n the D tit!o er to oa n 77 R, .24 39 o il me quarters bearinq Hous No.231, MIG-II situated at A.P.H ousinq Board Colonv Near Old Power Ho use. Karimna oar and in resoonse t the letter, dated

23.O4. 016 of the soondent H usiho Board issued he Detitioner. the oetitioner madea entation, dated 24.05.2015 to the resDondent Housi no Board and reoue sted the resoondents to consider the case of the etitioner for allotm nt of ouarter at the rate on ar with other allottees clea rlv informin o that the said ouarter cost was not to the said more than Rs.3 lakhs. n resoon f the 2 16 24 n soondent Housino Board reiterated the same f h s oua rter vide ! er, da d L6.O7.2 o16. ter dated 23 .o4.2lJr.6. dated

10. A bare Deru a I of thel L6.O7. 2016 and also th L7.O9 -2016 issued to the oetitioner do not indica reas ns for retecttnot he reo to f the Det ttoner for rder im ouoned. o r 'll I I l allotment o f h su tect khs ancl thesam e tn d s a ded bv the r n t e ad itto nal materta I o 6 u DErs t e o n do 4 9 o o d it d e deed w s Boa rd v,de sal 9 o D o 8 7 o a e 8 o m a In u o n x r f s ondent T a d v n e n r oft e u -fo h d 18 u arter r an lmo u t of Rs. 3 he siI dra D nd n Ho u !nq B was th e t t h o a C deeds fited bv i rner's case as t 202l on uqh r.A.No 11 () ,I o a l d e s da 1 n L I016. The said n r I a rt licate that the h reSDorI len Ht c.N .a 1,64 t 2005 d 3 2 1 o 6in a t V o 04. o 11, fth e rate fixed at v r_ n resDect of arded bv the e ents in the a No.5 to g t h o e h e s o ble, tn vtew j lapse had : tt Housinq 19 Board in can llation of the house allotted i favour of the ti toner n h ear 199 notice to the oetitioner, u ilaterallv, arbitrar lv. which had been challenqed bv th Detitioner herein bv filino W.P.No.84 21 of 2OOO and th s Court vide its o er. dated

08.04.201 5 allowed the said writ oetition in favour of the rh rein wit inf vour o the oetitioner. The clear adm ission made at Dara No.S of h count filed b t h total co h se fixe .24 39 oo h revailin value d local en conducted in the vear 2O16 bv exercisino the oower under Section 1 A of Housinq Boa Act. 1956 bv the comoetent Authoritv and the said stand out-forth bv the l"t resoonde t is not tenable and is contrarv to the soirit of the orders of this Court, dated 08.04.2015 assed in W.P.No.8 427. of 2OOO and is I able to be reiected in view of the fact t at this Court dire resoondent Housino Board to orovide anv other alternative house ava ilable for such allotment ammediatelv to the petitaoner or in the near lfilment of all the reo ul red f rmaliti es future su iect to for such al lotmentvide its o er. dated O8. 04.2015 Da ssed .I ,n inW N 42 e res ond 2 n ver h n n of ti e th r o f Rs 4 9 o m l,ined its finalitv toet e ame t nd nr anamo nt of I _ oer the then o er v lin k al ed n u dis lle al ar e 2 s e oulrv o ti t 1V tustifi tlr : very SDiritof rd rs of th s o w.P. o.8421of2 oo ln a a d

4. ,J f1 5 ssed in ur of he Detiti 1 ner herein.

12. behalf of the respondent respondent Housing goard The plea at para No.g of the counter a i fidavit fited on No.1 indicir:es that the had securcr( a financiat assistance from HUDCO and repayment vr rs made with interest and other charges and hence, the interest, incidental charges and penal anterest on th I outstanding instalments have to be collected from the ,etitioner as collected from other allottees of the said sr: reme and the same is contrary to the sate deed execute:r I in favour of the allottees in the year 2022 by the respondent Housing Board and also contrary to the very scheme il self. 2t

13. The additaonal counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.1 to the addational affidavit filed by the petitioner curiously remain silent and does not answer the specific pleas put-forth by the petitioner in support of the present writ petition filed by the petitioner in I'A.No. O1 of 2021 filed on O6.12.2021, duly enclosing copy of sale deeds, dated 29.O6.2005, 08.04.2011 and O8.11.2O16 which clearly indicates as borne on record that the petitioner had been discriminated for reasons best known to the respondent Housing Board.

14. In the light of the discussion and conclusion as arrived at para Nos.s to 13 to this Court opines that the subject issue requires reconsaderation by the 1't respondent herein.

15. Takinq into consideration:- a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. b) The submissions put-forth by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. { T i I 22 c) The averments made in the cour I er affidavit and additional counter affidavit filed ,r r behalf of the respondents (referred to and extra,: :ed above) d) The order of this Court, dated Og.O.l 2015 passed in W.P.No.8421 of 2OOO fited by the petitioner challenging the canceltation of it lotment letter (referred to and extracted above). e) The contents of letter.No.231 MIG.IIl KMN R/ E3 / EE / wgt / 2ot6 / 46t, 17.09.2016 issued by the 1"t petitioner (referred to and extracted rbove) resgr rndent to the f) The contents MG.IIlKMNR / E3 / EE lwga / 2Ot6 / tss, 23.04.2016 issued by the t* respc ndent to the petitioner (referred to and extracted a bove) Lr.No.231 g) The representations of the petil ioner, clated 12.02.20I-6, 24.05.2()16 & 03.09.20:: ; anct repties of respondent Housing Board t, the said representations, dated 23.O4.2016, r6.07.2016 &

17.09.2016 23 h) The interim orders granted in favour of the petitaoner, dated 28.O3.2018 passed in I.A.No.O1 of 2018 in the present W.P.No.9161 of 2018 which are an force as on date(referred to and extracted above) i) The initial allotment order in favour of the petitioner, dated 3 1. 1O. 1997 j) The material documents filed by the petitioner in support of petitioner's case pertaining to sale deeds executed by the respondent Housing Board, dated

08. 1 1. 20 16, 24.O6.2OL6, O8.O4. 20 1 6, 17.O5.2OL7 &

05.O8.2O22, indicating the cost of quarter allotted in respect of the said allottees as RS.2,O9,6OO/' only. k) The clear admission in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 at para No.s of the counter affidavit that the prevailing market value in the year 2O15 was the basis for demanding an amount of the Rs.24,39,OOO/- to the petitioner which is illegal and without any justification and contrary to the spirit of the orders of this Court, dated 08.O4.2O15 passed in W.P.No'8421 of 2OOO 24 1 the petitior er which had passed in favour of attained finatity. l) The pleas put-forth in the adcli tional counter rarticular para affidavit filed by the petitioner in No.7 which is in fact contrary to executed by the Housing Board irr favour of the alrottees in the years 2005, 2011 81 2016 and arso contrary to the scheme itself. he sale deeds m) The fact as borne on record thir the allotment in favour of the petitioner in the l ear 1997 and therefore, the cost of the house shor tld be fixed as on the date of such altotme[t irr view of the directions of thas Court, dated Og.O4,l O15 passed in W.P.No.8421 of 2OOO. th e w I w a or ved foJ, 3 MI 7 9 ord r M E e r I tm uqn :l) 6t46 n n t st e- t e our of t m u e D ti ao t e o cl d er bv a I otment made I the balance ln( n r ard s the u rter o B 2 ar ol 25 -I t o K f ur o4 w k co D\/Of thi ordera Der the allotmen t ordert e d I t Is t tot he u 31

0.1 97 h c s e u s a d a n v t idH B o.2 G.I Pha -II to he h ln n a d to of t any Drtor noticeto the Detitionerwhich co DEIIedt he DEtitioner filinqt he hisCo rt bv aDO roach

27. 4.2 I .P N 42 of2 o d e e on r w v o a o4 o1 w a o d r v n Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. To //TRUE COPY// Sd/.B.REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER One Fair Copy to the Hon'bte MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA (For Her Ladyships Kind perusal) Affairs, New Dethi. 1 . 1 'l LR Copies. 2. Th-e Under Secretary, Union of lndia Ministry of Law, Justice and Company 3. The Secretary. Telanoana Advocates Association Library, High Court 4. The Executive Enoineer (Housing), Telangana Housing Board, Warangal. 5. The Vice Chairmai-r ana lrrtanagin"-ri Directo"i i"rrn'6Jnr, 6 TheJunior Enginder, Teldngana Housing Board, Karimnagar, Karimnagar Ur,fd Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad. Housing Board, a) Buildinqs, Hvilerabadl -

7. One CC to SRI K.RAMALINGESW4IIA SARMA, Adv<rr ate [OpUC] 8. One CC to SRI CHITTAM BUCHI REDDY, Sc FoR T = -AN.GANA 1IoUSING BOARD [OPUC] 9. Two CD Copies PSK. PMK w '..4i HIGH COURT DATED:0611112025 ORDER WP.No.9161 of 2018 \ 1 J I f ) ;\ iIAr€ 1\[$, 1s'! {) I * () t I ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS --1- JKS z,lz lx