Judgment :- 1. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioners praying for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the respondent, dated 12. 2000, made in L1/31668/99, quash the same and direct the respondent to convert the existing Economically Weaker Sections Plots as regular Plots, in the approved plan No.PPD/LO/No.131/93 of Mugalivakkam Village, pertaining to the properties of the petitioners. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioners had made a representation, dated 12. 1999, to the respondent to reconvert the Plots allotted to the Economically Weaker Sections as regular Plots in the approved plans. 3. However, the respondent, by a letter, dated 12. 2000 made in L1/31668/99, had stated that the request of the petitioners had been rejected, since the authority has resolved that the reservation of the Economically Weaker Sections plots has to be continued. No reason has been given in the said communication of the respondent, dated 12. 2000. 4. The main grievance of the petitioners, as submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, is that the impugned communication does not contain any reason for the rejection of the representation of the petitioners. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent had stated that the reservation of the Plots for the Economically Weaker Sections is a policy decision of the respondent and therefore, the representation of the petitioners had been rejected. 6. At the stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had submitted that it would suffice if the petitioners are permitted to make a fresh representation to the respondent, with regard to the reliefs sought for in the writ petition and if the respondent is directed to dispose of the same, on merits, within a specified time. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has no objection for this Court passing such an order. 8. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has no objection for this Court passing such an order. 8. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned, the petitioners are permitted to make a representation to the respondent, with regard to the reliefs sought for in the writ petition, within a period of four weeks from today, and on such representation being submitted, the respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. 9. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.