B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J. ( 1 ) WRIT appeal is directed against the order made in WP No. 258 of 1994, dated 21-1-2002 by a learned Single Judge of this Court setting aside the orders of the Government in G. O. Ms. No. 1203, dated 29-11-1993 and directing the Government "to reconsider the matter in the wake of the changed situation keeping in view the guidelines issued by the government in this regard. . . . " ( 2 ) THE 4th respondent-society in the writ petition is the appellant before us. ( 3 ) BEFORE adverting to the question as to whether the first respondent-writ petitioner society is entitled for any relief in the writ petition, a few relevant facts may have to be noticed: that an insignificant order made by the government in G. O. Ms. No. 1203, dated 29-11-1993 directing the District Collector to alienate an extent of Ac. 0-56 cents of land in Survey Nos. 833/2 and 833/3 of nandyal Mandal and Town, Kurnool District on payment of market value at the rate of rs. 3,333/- per cent had given rise to this writ petition purported to have been filed in public interest. ( 4 ) THE first respondent-writ petitioner is a registered society under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. It claims to have come into existence for the purpose of serving the interest of the citizens of Nandyal Town and also to organise the development of Nandyal Town. One of its objectives is to attend the grievances of the public at large by bringing the same to the notice of the authorities concerned and find a proper solution therefor. A laudable object indeed. ( 5 ) THE grievance of the first respondent-writ petitioner-society is that the government ought not to have alienated its valuable land of Ac. 0-56 cents situated in the midst of the town in favour of the appellant-society even on payment of market value. The impugned G. O. is challenged on various grounds. ( 6 ) IT is stated in the affidavit filed by the first respondent-writ petitioner in support of the writ petition that this particular piece of land admeasuring Ac. 0-61 cents called as "rojakunta Poramboke" is situated in the heart of Nandyal Town. That out of the said land, an extent of Ac. 0-26 cen. ( 6 ) IT is stated in the affidavit filed by the first respondent-writ petitioner in support of the writ petition that this particular piece of land admeasuring Ac. 0-61 cents called as "rojakunta Poramboke" is situated in the heart of Nandyal Town. That out of the said land, an extent of Ac. 0-26 cen. ts of land was already in possession of the fisheries Department as the same has been alienated in its favour under the orders of the Government in G. O. Ms. No. 173, dated 19-10-1981. The Fisheries Department constructed its office and fishponds in the land assigned to them. The very same land could not have been alienated by the government in favour of the appellant- society. ( 7 ) THE first respondent-writ petitioner society claims to have made a representation to the Government for allotment of balance of Ac. 0-41 cents to the Government Girls high School as the School had no pucca building of its own. That based on the said representation, the Government assigned the land for construction of pucca permanent building for Girls High School. It is also the case of the first respondent-writ petitioner that as at present, the High School is located in a dilapidated rented building and needs a pucca building of its own. ( 8 ) THE Chief Engineer, SETKUR, kurnool applied for assignment of this very land in June, 1984 for construction of a College building for Special Training scheme meant for educated unemployed youth. The Government allotted this land for location of the said College and also handed over the advance possession to the chief Engineer, SETKUR. The SETKUR was accordingly directed to pay the market value to the State Government. But for reasons best known, the project did not materialise. ( 9 ) THAT the additional ground raised by the first respondent-writ petitioner is that this particular land abuts the Municipal High school playground and, therefore, the nandyal Municipality thought it fit to annex it to the Municipal playground and utilise the same for public purposes. The municipality intended to extend the playground so as to be utilised for various public purposes. The Nandyal Municipality accordingly passed resolution on 29-2-1988 resolving to apply to the Government for alienating the said land in favour of municipal Council for extension of playground of Municipal High School. The municipality intended to extend the playground so as to be utilised for various public purposes. The Nandyal Municipality accordingly passed resolution on 29-2-1988 resolving to apply to the Government for alienating the said land in favour of municipal Council for extension of playground of Municipal High School. That all of a sudden, the Government issued the impugned G. O. proposing to alienate an extent of Ac. 0-56 cents out of the total extent of Ac. 0-61 cents of land in favour of the appellant herein ignoring its previous commitments and contrary to public interest. The land, which could have been utilised for a valid pubic purpose, is sought to be alienated in favour of the appellant herein without any reason or justification. ( 10 ) IT is also the case set up by the first respondent-writ petitioner that the impugned g. O. , alienating the Government land in favour of a particular community is contrary to secular values enshrined in the constitution. The Government cannot make available its own properties and alienate them for sectarian purposes. This precisely is the case set up by the first respondent- writ petitioner. ( 11 ) THE Joint Collector filed a comprehensive counter-affidavit for and on behalf of the official respondents explaining the ground realities. It is just and necessary to briefly notice the averments made in the counter-affidavit. ( 12 ) SO far as the alienation of an extent of Ac. 0-20 cents of land to the Fisheries department under G. O. Rt. No. 1162, dated 19-10-1981 is concerned, it is explained that the site so allotted to the Fisheries department was insufficient and the department itself abandoned the land and shifted its nursery to Nandyal Big Tank where sufficient land was allotted by the government for the purposes of nursery and also construction of staff quarters. The land earlier allotted to the Fisheries department thus remained waste and unutilised. ( 13 ) SO far as the question as to whether the land has been allotted to the Girls High school is concerned, it is stated that in the year 1981 there was a proposal from the education Department for alienation of land in question for construction of Girls High school. ( 13 ) SO far as the question as to whether the land has been allotted to the Girls High school is concerned, it is stated that in the year 1981 there was a proposal from the education Department for alienation of land in question for construction of Girls High school. While the proposals were under process, the Executive Engineer (Randb) department has expressed his opinion that rojakunta land which contains several ditches and having loose soil is not at all fit to withstand the foundation for the construction of the said school building. Consequent upon the opinion given by the executive Engineer, the Education department gave up the idea of constructing girls High School in the said land. As at present, the Education Department had already constructed its own building meant for the Girls High School at a different place in the land acquired for the said purpose as early as in the year 1980-81, which is nearer to the RTC bus stand, nandyal. ( 14 ) IT is admitted in the counter- affidavit that the Chief Executive Officer, setkur has applied for alienation of land to an extent of Ac. 0-36 cents in Survey No. 833/3 of Rojkunta, Nandyal for construction of Building to conduct special training scheme to the educated unemployed. The government in principle agreed for alienation of the said land on payment of -market value, but the Chief Executive Officer expressed his unwillingness to pay the market value of the land. Thus the proposals could not materialise. ( 15 ) THE Municipality by its resolution dated 29-2-1988 has resolved to request the collector, Kurnool for alienation of rqjakunta land for extension of municipal playground. Even while the said proposals were pending, the Municipality had acquired another land for the purpose of extension of the existing olayground. It is under those circumstances, the Municipality has recalled its earlier resolution for extension of playground vide its resolution dated 29-10-1988. The Municipality had not only given up its claim as against the said land for extension of playground, but also expressed its no objection for making available the said land for construction of Shadikhana. Thus the municipality itself expressed its no objection for construction of Shadikhana in the land in question. The Municipality had not only given up its claim as against the said land for extension of playground, but also expressed its no objection for making available the said land for construction of Shadikhana. Thus the municipality itself expressed its no objection for construction of Shadikhana in the land in question. ( 16 ) RESPECTING the allegation that there is a "nagulakatta" and "naga Idols" in the land which is now sought to be alienated in favour of the appellant herein and such allotment may result in unavoidable consequences leading to disharmony and strife among the people in the Town, it is stated by the Joint Collector in his counter affidavit that the said Nagulakatta is not coming in the way for construction of shadikhana. This portion of the land can easily be sub-divided before actually delivering the possession of the land to the appellant-society. ( 17 ) IT is further explained that out of the total extent of Ac. 0-61 cents of land in survey No. 833 of Nandyal Town, an extent of Ac 0-05 cents is in the road limits connecting the Byrmal Street to sanjeevanagar and what remains is only ac. 0-56 cents, which has been made available to the appellant herein on payment of market value. ( 18 ) THE learned Judge without adverting to anv of the grounds raised in the writ petition allowed the writ petition and accordingly set aside the impugned order remitting the matter for fresh consideration by the Government on the ground that subsequent to filing of the writ petition, the government made available an extent of ac. 0-60 cents of land for the purpose of construction of Shadikhana in the same town and in view of the same it is just and necessary for the Government to reconsider as to whether the land already alienated in favour of the appellant herein is to be resumed. ( 19 ) SRI E. Ayyapu Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant-society contended that the view taken by the learned Judge in setting aside the impugned G. O. , issued by the Government is wholly untenable and unsustainable. The learned Counsel contended that subsequent event of making some land available for similar purpose cannot make the earlier order of the government illegal. The learned Counsel contended that subsequent event of making some land available for similar purpose cannot make the earlier order of the government illegal. The learned Counsel also contended that the Government did not assign or allot the land in favour of the appellant herein, but alienated the same on payment of market value, in which event only question, if at all, arises is as to whether the market value fixed is proper and sufficient. The appellant-society is required to pay huge amount of Rs. 1,86,666/- towards the market value of the alienated land. It is a straight and simple sale of the government land in favour of the appellant- society. ( 20 ) SRI C. B. Rammohan Reddy, learned counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner strenuously contended that the impugned G. O. suffers from incurable legal infirmities and constitutional vice. The learned Counsel submitted that the impugned G. O. infringes the secular values inbuilt in the constitutional scheme. No land could have been allotted by the Government for a sectarian purposes. The land, if at all, could have been used only for public purposes. The learned Counsel further contended that the Government is not justified in alienating the land in favour of the appellant herein ignoring the claim of so many institutions seeking the assignment of the land for public purposes. Ignoring such legitimate claims, the State had chosen to alienate the land in favour of a particular section of the Society. ( 21 ) WE have given our anxious consideration to the rival submissions made. ( 22 ) THE learned Counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in S. R. Bommai v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1918 , and Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India, (1994) 6 SCC 360 , in support of his submission that the impugned order of the government alienating the land in favour of the appellant society is in contravention of secular principles enshrined in Constitution of India. We express our inability to accept the same. The decisions upon which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner do not support the point urged by him. We express our inability to accept the same. The decisions upon which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner do not support the point urged by him. We fail to appreciate as to how the alienation of the Government land for a valuable consideration and that too at the market value for the purpose of construction of a Shadikhana by a welfare society is contrary to the secular values. The appellant- society purchased the land from the government for a valuable consideration. The appellant-society itself is a welfare society. Merely because the land has been purchased by it from the Government for the purpose of construction of a Shadikhana where marriages belonging to a particular community may be performed in accordance with the rites of that particular community itself cannot be said to be in violation of secular values inbuilt in the Constitution. The submission made by the learned counsel merits no serious consideration. We accordingly reject the same. ( 23 ) THE counter-affidavit filed by the respondent-Joint Collector in clear and categorical terms reveals that there has been no claim pending as on date by any person or institution for allotment of land for utilisation of the same for any specific public purpose. The land allotted earlier in favour of the Fisheries Department remained unutilised, as the same was insufficient for its purpose. The Fisheries department did not raise its little finger when it was asked to move from the said land since vast extent of land was allotted to it where it had already started its nursery and constructed staff quarters and functioning without any difficulty whatsoever. In the circumstances, we hold that there was no claim of the Fisheries Department as on the date when the Government issued the impugned G. O. ( 24 ) THE learned Counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner placing reliance upon the judgment of this Court in M/s. Road Metal Industry v. Secretary to government of A. P. , 2001 (6) ALD 166 = 2001 (5) ALT 760 = AIR 2002 A. P. 284, however, contended that without cancelling the earlier allotment of land made in favour of the Fisheries Department, the government could not have issued the present G. O. alienating the very land in favour of the appellant-society. It is required to notice that the earlier G. O. , and as well as the present G. O. were issued by the government. The land in Survey No. 833 of nandyal Town alienated under the earlier g. O. , in favour of the Fisheries Department remained unutilised. The department virtually abandoned the land and moved to a different place provided by the Government. The earlier order of the Government has worked out itself. At any rate, the Fisheries department is not before us challenging the action of the respondent-Government in issuing the impugned G. O. Ms. No. 1203, dated 29-11-1993. The objection raised in this regard by the learned Counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner is without any merit. ( 25 ) THE next question that falls for consideration is as to whether the subsequent proceedings issued by the Government dated 16-12-1997 and 16-6-1998, whereunder the government has accorded permission to alienate the site in Survey No. l880/b of nandyal to an extent of Ac. 0-60 cents in favour of the District Collector, Kurnool so as to make the same available to the director/secretary, Urdu Academy, Andhra pradesh, Hyderabad and accordingly hand over the possession of the same to the executive Engineer (Randb), Nandyal for construction of Shadikhana, would invalidate the impugned order of the Government in g. O. Ms. No. 1203, dated 29-11-1993? ( 26 ) THE proceedings dated 16-6-1998 are self-explanatory. The Government has not only decided to alienate the said land but also accorded administrative sanction for a sum of Rs. 7. 50 lakhs for construction of Urdu Bhavan at Nadyal. The authorities were accordingly directed to deliver the vacant possession of the said land in anticipation of the assignment/alienation of the land by the Government. The land is sought to be alienated in favour of the director, Urdu Academy, Andhra Pradesh. We fail to appreciate as to how the subsequent proceedings wherein the government has decided to part away with its own land for the purpose of construction of Urdu Academy would make the impugned order of the Government selling away its own land for a valuable consideration in favour of the appellant- society invalid for whatever reason. We fail to appreciate as to how the subsequent proceedings wherein the government has decided to part away with its own land for the purpose of construction of Urdu Academy would make the impugned order of the Government selling away its own land for a valuable consideration in favour of the appellant- society invalid for whatever reason. The government in its wisdom and discretion thought it fit to alienate the land in favour of the Director, Urdu Academy for its purposes including construction of a shadikhana in the said land about which there is no dispute whatsoever is raised. It is not as if whole of the land has been alienated for the purpose of construction of a Shadikhana alone. ( 27 ) BE that as it may, the decision of the Government proposing to alienate the land in favour of the Director, Urdu Academy is not in challenge before us. This subsequent decision of the Government would not invalidate the earlier order of the Government wherein the Government has alienated its own land for a valuable consideration in favour of the appellant-society. The appellant-society is not the beneficiary of any assignment or alienation of the land by the Government. It has purchased the land on payment of market value. ( 28 ) IN such view of the matter, we find it difficult to sustain the impugned order passed by the learned Judge. The writ petition is totally devoid of any merit. ( 29 ) HOWEVER, as has been undertaken in the counter-affidavit filed by the Joint collector, necessary steps shall immediately be taken for proper demarcation of the land duly separating the place occupied by "nagulakatta" and "naga Idols" so as to avoid unnecessary controversy in the matter. The fact remains, that portion of the land is not alienated by the Government in favour of the appellant-society. The government as well as the Joint Collector shall take necessary steps forthwith and clearly demarcate the land alienated in favour of the appellant-society and the portion of the land occupied by "nagulakatta" and "naga Idols" and take such further steps as may be necessary to maintain prevailing peace and tranquility and public order in town. ( 30 ) FOR the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order is set aside. The writ petition shall stand dismissed. Consequently, the writ appeal is allowed, There shall be no order as to costs. z