THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14411 of 2008 ORDER: Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 and father of petitioner No.4 were allotted house sites at Eskapalli Village, Kaluvai Mandal, Nellore District way back in the year 1982. In the recent past, these very house sites were allotted in favour of respondent Nos.4 to 7. The petitioners complain that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are trying to dispossess them from their house sites and that they have not been issued any notice, much less any proceedings were served cancelling the allotment of sites in their favour. On behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3, a counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that the petitioners were not eligible to be granted house site pattas and in that view of the matter, the pattas were cancelled after notifying the affected parties by beat of tom-tom. Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 filed a counter-affidavit stating that after the plots were allotted to them along with other beneficiaries, they have started construction of houses by investing huge amounts. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 7. There is no dispute that the petitioners were allotted house sites way back in the year 1982. In case the petitioners violated the conditions of assignment, it was always open to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to initiate proceedings under the Board Standing Orders or any other relevant provisions of law. Issuance of notice to the affected parties is one of the fundamental requirements. Admittedly, no such notice was issued to the petitioners. Announcement through beat of tom-tom hardly constitutes compliance with the principles of natural justice. Another aspect of the matter is that the house site pattas were cancelled after lapse of 27 years. It may be true that respondent Nos.4 to 7 were allotted these very plots and they, in turn, have started construction. That, however, cannot be the basis to deny the relief to the petitioners. Once, it is found that the pattas granted to the petitioners were cancelled without following the procedure prescribed by law, the only alternative is to restore the possession of the house sites to them. In case the subsequent allottees i.e. respondent Nos. 4 to 7 have commenced the construction, respondent Nos.1 to 3 shall have to consider the feasibility of allotting house sites in the same locality to the petitioners also. Hence, the writ petition is allowed with the following terms: (a) the steps taken by respondent Nos.1 to 3 for cancelling the house site pattas granted in favour of the petitioners are set aside; (b) respondent Nos. 1 to 3 shall restore the possession of the house sites to the petitioners or in the alternative, to provide house sites of equal size in the same locality to them; and (c) this exercise shall be completed within a period of six (6) weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:01.06.2009 kdl