In the second case, the High Court passed severe strictures on the conduct of lour non-official members of the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board in the allotment of houses constructed by it. One of these members is at present Minister for Electricity. The members were indicted for being instrumental in getting a resolution passed by virtue of their majority at the board meeting, allotting houses "ignoring the public duty cast on a statutory board". The court, disposing of the writ petitions filed by some applicants and invalidating the allotments made, considered that "it was regrettable that non-official members wanted to have discretionary quota for each one of them, when they found that their candidates were not getting allotments on the basis of the marking system. . . . The illegal and improper conduct resulted in serious loss to the Housing Board and to the applicants who should have had the allotments long ago". The Court said that the chairman of the Board (who did not attend the meeting), as well as the State Government, were equally to blame. Subsequently the Court refused to modify its remarks against the chairman, who, it was claimed, was on leave on the dates when the allotments were made and, therefore, could not be held responsible for the decisions. Discussion on the judgment was put off until a certified copy of it could be procured. Though the Minister involved did not choose to make any explanatory statement, a sequel to the judgment was the resignation of the three other non- official members of the Board. In a statement, they said that "we tried to the best of our ability, our conscience, and by collective approach to allot houses to a great majority of persons who are not in a position to construct their own". The judgment, however, acquired particular significance by the candid observations it made against "Government's policy" of choosing only politicians as members of statutory boards, ignoring men of character and ability from other walks of life. The branding of politicians as a tribe led to a section of the legislators preferring a privilege motion against the judge. Inherent in the situation are thus seeds of a confrontation between the High Court and the Legislature.
