Judgment :- S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. In both the appeals, as common question of law involved and preferred against common order dated 30th Aug., 2006, passed by learned single Judge, they were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The appellants were allotted houses by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board prior to 30th Dec., 2000, but as the final price has not been deposited, their respective houses were not registered in their favour. There being no takers, many of the constructed houses having not sold, the State Government issued G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001, instructing the Housing Board to sell those houses at the rate fixed at the time of completion of the construction by waiving the interest calculated from the date of completion of construction till the date of its selling. Though the respective house of the appellants were allotted prior to 30th Dec., 2000, but for laches on their part they were not registered in their favour; the appellants wanted to derive the advantage of G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001 for waiver of interest and the same having rejected by learned single Judge vide impugned common order dated 30th Aug., 2006, the appellants have preferred the respective appeals against such judgment. 3. The appellant, K.Rangasamy of W.A. No.1648/06 preferred W.P. No.17187/01 for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to fix the final price for the house No.H2M2-124 at Rani Mangammal Colony, Dindigul at Rs.3,45,900/= as per G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001. The other appellant, R. Saravanan of W.A. No.1647/06 preferred W.P. No.17188/01 against the order contained in letter No.R-11/HIG-68 L/2000 dated 16th July, 2001, issued by the Housing Board with further prayer to direct the respondents to fix the final price of the house HIG 68-L at Rani Mangammal Colony, Dindigul at Rs.7,64,200/= as per G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001. 4. The brief facts of the case is that the appellant, K. Rangasamy, applied for allotment of MIG house on 29th Jan., 2000 and the appellant, R. Saravanan, applied for allotment of HIG house on 13th Nov., 2000. The respondent, Housing Board allotted their respective houses on 5th Dec., 2000 and 17th Nov., 2000 respectively. The appellants paid their initial deposits and the monthly instalments upto Aug., 2001. The respondent, Housing Board allotted their respective houses on 5th Dec., 2000 and 17th Nov., 2000 respectively. The appellants paid their initial deposits and the monthly instalments upto Aug., 2001. They entered into a lease-cum-sale agreement and taken possession of their respective houses on 2nd Jan., 2001 and 3rd Jan., 2001, respectively. In the meantime, Government having issued G.O.No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001, to the effect that in respect of the houses constructed before 30th June, 2006 and remained unsold till 31st Dec., 2000, by the Housing Board, it had been decided to waive the interest in respect of the amount payable by the allottees and same can be sold at the revised price. Pursuant to the said Government Order, the appellants submitted respective representations seeking to extend the benefit of the said Government Order dated 22nd Jan., 2001 by refixing the final price of the house allotted to them, which having denied, they preferred their respective writ petitions. .5. Counsel for the appellants submitted that no sale having taken place prior to 31st Dec., 2000, the appellants are eligible and entitled for the benefit under G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001. She placed reliance on laws and judgments of various Courts to define sale, which reaches finality after execution of a sale deed. According to her, merely an agreement having entered into, it cannot be said that sale has taken place. On the other hand, the stand taken by the counsel for the Housing Board is that G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001, is meant for those houses for which there was no takers and nobody applied or opted to take such house. The appellants having opted for their respective houses, it cannot be stated that there was no applicant for those two flats and, therefore, not eligible for grant of benefit in terms with G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001. .6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, noticed their rival contentions and perused the records. 7. It is not in dispute that G.O. No.29 was issued on 22nd Jan., 2001. Much prior to that the appellants entered into agreement for sale with the Housing Board and taken possession of their respective houses on 2nd and 3rd Jan., 2001, respectively. They have paid their monthly instalments as per sale agreement upto Aug., 2001. 7. It is not in dispute that G.O. No.29 was issued on 22nd Jan., 2001. Much prior to that the appellants entered into agreement for sale with the Housing Board and taken possession of their respective houses on 2nd and 3rd Jan., 2001, respectively. They have paid their monthly instalments as per sale agreement upto Aug., 2001. Thus, it is clear that the parties acted in terms with the agreement reached between them irrespective of G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001. The G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001, is in vernacular (Tamil), English version of which has been supplied by counsel for the appellant and reads as follows:- "Government Order (Stage) No.29 Date : 21. 2001 Government Order (Stage) No.427, Housing and Suburban Town Development Department dated 110. 2000. ORDER: Tamil Nadu Housing Board had constructed houses/flats in apartments in various places of Tamil Nadu and are remain unsold. Therefore to sell the unsold houses and flats with immediate effect, High Committee was convened under the Presidentship of the Honble Minister for Housing and Chief Secretary. Subsequently they have submitted their report to the Government. The Government after its keen perusal of the said report passed the following orders:- 1. The houses and apartments (flats), those who have been constructed prior to 30.6.2000 and were remain unsold till 312. 2000 can be sold at the rate fixed at the time of completion of the construction by waiving the interest calculated from the date of completion of construction till the date of its selling. 2. While allotting the plots/houses/apartments (flats) after the construction (scheme) was over terms and conditions should be followed in the same terms and conditions of the Board as if at the first instance. After that, for the remaining unsold flats/houses/apartments (flats) and to sell the same, the existing terms and conditions may be relaxed on the basis of the "First come – first" and sell the same accordingly. .a. The applicant should be native of Tamil Nadu State .b. The applicant should have completed 21 years of age. .c. House/plot/apartment (flat should not be exceeded in allotment to an applicant more than one. 3. The existing terms and conditions that to get sale deed, one should submit house tax receipt, and the said condition is hereby waived. 4. .a. The applicant should be native of Tamil Nadu State .b. The applicant should have completed 21 years of age. .c. House/plot/apartment (flat should not be exceeded in allotment to an applicant more than one. 3. The existing terms and conditions that to get sale deed, one should submit house tax receipt, and the said condition is hereby waived. 4. Apart from the sects already get eligibility for the allotment under Government Quota, employees, those who are working in public sector, limited public companies, employees who are employed in the organizations affiliated to (undertaken by) Central Government, Journalists, employees of the Nationalized Banks and employees of Insurance Companies undertaken by the Government should be included in the eligibility list as they are eligible for allotment of houses. 5. Houses, apartments, quarters constructed by the Housing Board and if remain unsold, that can be allotted/changed into Police Quarters/Government Servants quarters as necessitated/situation emerged. 6. Necessary actions shall be taken to reduce sale value of the constructed house/flats/apartment by reducing the unnecessary expenses on employees involved in the construction work and also by reducing unnecessary expenses." From the aforesaid Government Order dated 22nd Jan., 2001, it will be evident that in view of the fact that there was no takers for many of the apartments and flats constructed by the Housing Board and no step having taken to sell them, Government decided not to charge interest for those, who may apply subsequently for purchase of such flats after 31st Dec., 2000. While para-1 of G.O. No.29 speaks of sale of the constructed house, para-2 therein stipulates how allotment of plots/houses/apartments (flats) should be made by following the terms and conditions. Para-3 of the said G.O. No.29 also speaks of terms and conditions of the sale deed by waiving the condition of submitting house tax receipt. Even the eligibility criteria is different than the earlier one as reflected at para-4 of G.O. No.29. If the intention of the government is looked into, it will be evident that the State Government was very clear while issuing G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001, it wanted to allot and sell the houses to those, who had not applied for such house prior to 30th Dec., 2000. If the intention of the government is looked into, it will be evident that the State Government was very clear while issuing G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001, it wanted to allot and sell the houses to those, who had not applied for such house prior to 30th Dec., 2000. Those who have applied prior to 30th Dec., 2000, allotted their respective flats and reached agreement for sale prior to 22nd Jan., 2001, and paid instalments for such payment, including the appellants, who have paid such instalments upto Aug., 2001, G.O. No.29 dated 22nd Jan., 2001 is not applicable to them nor the appellants can derive any advantage of the same. 8. Learned single Judge having disallowed such prayer, we find no ground made out to interfere with the common judgment dated 30th Aug., 2006. There being no merit, both the writ appeals are dismissed, but there shall be no order as to costs.