THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION Nos.439, 583 AND 777 of 2003 Dated: 29.12.2011 IN WRIT PETITION No.439 of 2003 Between : K.Nageswara Rao and 3 others … Petitioners And The Mandal Revenue Officer … Respondent IN WRIT PETITION No.583 of 2003 Between : Ch.Kanaka Raju and 47 others … Petitioners And The Mandal Revenue Officer … Respondent IN WRIT PETITION No.777 of 2003 Between : M.Papa Rao and 25 others … Petitioners And The Mandal Revenue Officer … Respondent THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION Nos.439, 583 AND 777 OF 2003 COMMON ORDER: The petitioners in all these writ petitions were assigned small extents of land situated in different survey numbers of Kanur Village, Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District. These writ petitions are filed aggrieved by the action of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Machilipatnam, dated 24.12.2002 in canceling the D-form pattas issued to the petitioners vide proceedings dated 24.12.2002. Admittedly show-cause notices were issued and in response to the same the petitioners submitted their explanations. Thereafter the impugned proceedings came to be issued canceling the D-form pattas on the ground that the petitioners had violated the conditions of assignment and converted the assigned lands into fish tanks. The orders of cancellation are assailed by the petitioners primarily on the ground that the respondents failed to make any enquiry and no specific finding was recorded as to the alleged violations. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is contended that the impugned orders have been rightly passed in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is also contended that the petitioners cannot maintain the writ petitions without exhausting the alternative remedy of appeal available under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. At the outset, it is to be noticed that whereas in the show-cause notices it was alleged that the assigned lands were converted into fish tanks contrary to CRZ notification, the impugned orders of cancellation came to be issued on a different ground namely that the petitioners had violated the conditions of assignment. It is also relevant to note that while issuing rule nisi, this Court by order dated 7.1.2003 granted interim suspension of the impugned proceedings and the same has been in operation all through. In the facts and circumstances noticed above, I am of the opinion that the matter requires reconsideration. Accordingly, the impugned orders of cancellation are hereby set aside and all the Writ Petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Mandal Revenue Officer to issue fresh show-cause notices to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Till such time, status quo obtaining as on today with regard to the possession of the lands in question shall be maintained. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 29.12.2011 Note:- CC in 3 days. (B/O) Ivd