IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO:3146 OF 2005 DATED:16.12.2010 Between: Munagala Pitchi Reddy .....PETITIONER AND The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kondapuram Mandal, Nellore District. .....RESPONDENT This Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO:3146 OF 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the resumption orders in Rc.B.293/2004, dated 15.2.2005 issued by the respondent, without waiting for 15 days, the time which was granted to the petitioner to submit explanation from the date of receipt of Form-I notice, as arbitrary and illegal. According to the petitioner, he had purchased Ac.1.32 cents of land under two registered sale deeds dated 11.9.2003 and 16.12.2003 and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. While that being so, on 5.2.2005, the petitioner was served with Form I notice dated 25.1.2004, under which he was asked to explain as to why the land purchased and occupied by him should not been resumed by the Government since it is an assigned land. The petitioner submitted an explanation on 15.2.2005. But the order impugned herein has been passed on 15.2.2005 itself. It is very interesting to note that there are so many blanks left over in the impugned order and the Mandal Revenue Officer signed the same and it was served on the petitioner. Apart from this, though it is stated that the land in question was assigned in favour of one Bandi Police, S/o Tirupalu and Bandi Peda Kondaiah, S/o Tirupalu, residents of Nekunampeta village, Kondapuram Mandal, Nellore District and patta was granted in their favour, but patta number and date were not mentioned in the impugned order. In a case of assigned land, unless and until the provisions of the A.P. Assigned Lands (POT) Act, 1977 are invoked and the patta granted earlier is cancelled, the question of passing orders which are impugned herein, does not arise. Even at the time of admission of the writ petition on 22.2.2005, this Court felt that prima facie, the order of the respondent dated 15.2.2005 is lacunic and perverse. Nothing more can be said even at this stage. Unless and until patta granted in favour of Bandi Police and Bandi Peda Kondaiah is cancelled, question of resumption orders does not arise. Even the reference made in the order dated 15.2.2005 does not reflect such a course of action taken by the respondent by serving notice on the said persons and cancelling the patta after hearing them. But directly, notice was served on the petitioner and before explanation that could be submitted by the petitioner, final orders have been passed, without waiting for 15 days time after service of notice. For all the above reasons, I am of the opinion that the order impugned herein is arbitrary and illegal and in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned order dated 15.2.2005 issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer in Rc.B.293/2004 is liable to be set aside and accordingly, set aside. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. ______________________ Justice C.V. Ramulu Dated:16.12.2010 Nn. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO:3146 OF 2005 16.12.2010