IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.11200 of 2002 Between: Vemananda Venkata Narasimhamurthy Raju S. … Petitioner And Special Grade Dy. Collector (LA), Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam and two others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P.Venkata Rama Sarma for Dr.P.B. Vijaya Kumar. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Land Acquisition for R.1 and R.2. None for R.3. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is ﬁled for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside order dated 9-4-2002 passed by respondent No.1. The petitioner claims to be a displaced person in connection with establishment of steel plant at Visakhapatnam. According to him, as a part of rehabilitation measure, respondent No.1 allotted an extent of 45 Sq.yards of house plot in favour of the petitioner in Vadlapudi village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam. By proceedings dated 9-4-2002, the said allotment, along with allotments made in favour of four others, was cancelled on the ground that the plots allotted to the petitioner and others were earmarked for development of green belt as per the Master Plan of Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, Visakhapatnam. In the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled by respondent No.1, the said reason has been reiterated. The main ground on which the petitioner questioned the impugned order is that before issuing the impugned proceedings no notice was given to him. The petitioner claimed that by the time of cancellation of allotment he has already constructed a house and was living therein. The fact that the impugned order is not preceded by a notice to the petitioner is not disputed. As the order of cancellation visits the petitioner with adverse civil consequences, respondent No.1 ought to have given a notice and an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before cancelling the allotment order. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. Respondent No.1 shall issue notice to the petitioner; and after considering the explanation, if any, submitted by him, he shall pass appropriate order. ------------------------- ----------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:06-11-2008 MNR