Judgment :- This order shall govern the above three writ petitions. 2. A challenge is made in these writ petitions to an order of the first respondent made in G.O.No.2D No.128 in respect of allotment of commercial plot C3 in Serial No.27 situated at Survey No.32/3B4 of Kondichettipatti Village, Namakkal Taluk in favour of the 6th respondent. 3. The affidavits filed in support of the petitions are perused. The court heard the learned counsel on either side. .4. The petitioners purchased each house plot jointly measuring a small extent of 15 cents totally in Survey No.32/3B4 in Kondichettipatti Village, Namakkal Taluk by way of a registered sale deed, dated 22.01.1985 for a sum of Rs.42000/- from the previous owner and they divided into three plots each measuring 5 cents and they got possession of the property and they were enjoying so. While the matter stood thus, acquisition proceedings were initiated and an award was passed on 18. 1987. It was for the purpose of implementation of housing scheme by Tamil Nadu Housing Board, but it was not done so. The compensation was fixed and accordingly, it was paid. Since the scheme was not implemented, the petitioners made representations to the first respondent on 7. 2004 for the reconveyance of the property, since it was not used for the said purpose. But, the representations were not considered. Hence, the petitioners filed writ petitions before this court in W.P.Nos.26832 to 26834 of 2004 and there was an order passed by this court directing the respondents to consider the same within stipulated time, but it was not done so. There arose a necessity for the petitioners to again file writ petitions before this court and a direction was also given. While the matter stood thus, even without considering the representations and passing any order, the first respondent has passed the order in G.O.No.2D No.128, dated 7. 2005, allotting the land to the 6th respondent herein. Under these circumstances, these writ petitions have been brought forth. 5. While the matter stood thus, even without considering the representations and passing any order, the first respondent has passed the order in G.O.No.2D No.128, dated 7. 2005, allotting the land to the 6th respondent herein. Under these circumstances, these writ petitions have been brought forth. 5. In support of the writ petitions, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that it is true, there was an acquisition in the year 1987 and the possession of the property was not handed over, but it was retained by the petitioners herein in the past; that acquisition was made for the purpose of implementation of housing scheme by the respondent Department, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, but it was not done for a period of more than 15 years; that representations were given under Section 48(B) of the Land Acquisition Act, expressing desire of the petitioners for reconveyance of the property on payment of entire compensation amount, but it was not done so, despite the orders passed by this court in the writ petitions and under these circumstances, the allotment order has got to be quashed. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the respondents. According to him, it is a case where Section 48(B) of the Land Acquisition Act cannot be applied; that it is true, originally, the lands were acquired by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for the purpose of implementation of housing scheme; that allotment has been made; that though it was made belatedly, it was for the public purpose and under these circumstances, no question of cancelling or quashing the impugned order would arise and hence, these writ petitions have got to be dismissed. 7. The submission of the learned counsel for the 6th respondent is also heard. .8. The court has paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made. After doing So, the court is of the considered opinion that all the writ petitions have got to be allowed. It is not in controversy that the petitioners are the owners of three plots, measuring 5 cents each. The lands were acquired and an award came to be passed on 13.08.1987. A reading of the same would clearly reveal that acquisition was made for the purpose of construction of houses in order to implement the housing scheme. But, it was not done for a period of more than 15 years. The lands were acquired and an award came to be passed on 13.08.1987. A reading of the same would clearly reveal that acquisition was made for the purpose of construction of houses in order to implement the housing scheme. But, it was not done for a period of more than 15 years. Under these circumstances, the petitioners made representations under Section 48(B) of the Act, stating that since the lands were not actually used for the purpose for which it was acquired, the Government may transfer the same to the petitioners and the petitioners are willing to repay the amount paid to them and hence, they made representations. But, the representations were kept pending. Hence, the petitioners came before this court and sought for direction. Accordingly, directions were issued. 9. From a perusal of the materials available, it would be quite clear that the order of allotment was made on 7. 2005. But, it was a matter of surprise to note that while the allotment order was passed on 7. 2005, the order was signed by the authority concerned on 27.07.2005. The intervening circumstance was the filing of the writ petitions before this court. At this juncture, it is pertinent to point out that the lands were acquired for a specific purpose of constructing houses in order to implement the housing scheme, but it was not done so for a period of more than 15 years. Representations were also made under Section 48(B) of the Act for reconveyance. Despite the orders of this court, they were not considered and allotment has been made. The court is of the considered opinion that it is a case where representations were originally made and even after the orders were passed by this court directing the respondent to consider the representations and pass suitable orders, the respondents have not considered the case. Hence, the allotment order has got to be cancelled. 10. In appraisement of the facts and circumstances of the case, the court is of the considered opinion that the allotments made in favour of the 6th respondent in respect of the petitions mentioned plot C3 in Serial No.27 situated at Survey No.32/3B4 of Kondichettipatti Village, Namakkal Taluk have got to be quashed. Accordingly, it is quashed. 10. In appraisement of the facts and circumstances of the case, the court is of the considered opinion that the allotments made in favour of the 6th respondent in respect of the petitions mentioned plot C3 in Serial No.27 situated at Survey No.32/3B4 of Kondichettipatti Village, Namakkal Taluk have got to be quashed. Accordingly, it is quashed. Again, a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners, referred to in the earlier writ petitions made, and pass suitable orders thereon as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks here from. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.