THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.14326 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners were granted pattas in respect of Ac.2.12 guntas and Ac.2.11 guntas of land, respectively, in Sy.No.659 of Bhoodan Pochampally Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District, vide proceedings dated 14-12-2000, by the A.P.Bhoodan Yagna Board, the 1st respondent herein. On certain complaints received against the petitioners to the effect that they are already holding other lands, proceedings were initiated, and through order dated 12-05-2008, the 1st respondent cancelled the pattas granted in favour of the petitioners and assigned the same in favour of respondents 4 to 8. One month thereafter, the 1st respondent addressed a letter to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhongir, the 2nd respondent herein, with a request to submit a report, in relation to the disputes between the petitioners and other claimants. This was followed by a letter dated 25-06-2008, by the 1st respondent to the effect that the report of the 2nd respondent is no longer necessary, since the pattas in favour of the petitioners have already been cancelled. The petitioners challenge the proceedings dated 12-05-2008 and 25-06-2008. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent, learned Government Pleader for respondents 2 and 3, and learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7. Obviously, on account of not being conversant with the legal procedure, the 1st respondent has chosen to cancel the pattas in favour of the petitioners, vide proceedings dated 12-05-2008, without issuing any notice and without conducting any enquiry. As though it is not sufficient, it has chosen to call for a report from the 2nd respondent, one month thereafter. The confusion was further confounded, when it revoked its proceedings dated 13-06-2008, vide their letter dated 25-06-2008. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were granted pattas in the year 2000. In case the pattas are to be cancelled, notices ought to have been issued to the petitioners, indicating the reasons therefor. It is only on consideration of explanations, that necessary orders of cancellation, or otherwise, could have been passed. There is a clear violation of principles of natural justice, in the instant case. Hence, the writ petition is allowed, and the proceedings dated 12-05-2008 are set aside. It is left open to the 1st respondent to pass fresh orders, after issuing notices to the petitioners, and considering the explanation that may be submitted by them. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt. 20-04-2009. KO