THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7391 of 2002 ORDER: The lands of the petitioners were acquired for the purpose of Visakha Steel Plant. Since they were totally displaced from their properties, the Government has decided to allot house sites to them as part of the entire exercise. Initially, petitioner No.1 was allotted plot No.35 and other petitioners, some different plots. However, the petitioners found that the said plots were allotted in favour of third parties. Therefore, they filed W.P.No.1581 of 2001. On an assurance given by the respondents that suitable plots would be allotted, the writ petition was withdrawn. Thereafter, the Special Grade Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Steel Plant, respondent No.1 herein, issued individual orders allotting plot Nos.2205, 2206 and 2209 to the petitioners. Within few months, respondent No.1 passed orders, dated 09.04.2002, cancelling the allotment of plots to the petitioners and allotting them some other plots. The petitioners challenge the said proceedings. They contend that they have already constructed houses on the plots allotted to them and there was absolutely no justification for respondent No.1 to pass the impugned order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition and the learned Standing Counsel for Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority. As many as three allotments came to be made by respondent No.1 in favour of the petitioners. Small plots of 107 square yards were allotted to the petitioners in lieu of the acquisition of their entire property for the benefit of the Steel Plant. The petitioners state that they made construction after the allotment in their favour was made on 16.06.2001. Respondent No.1 passed the impugned order, dated 09.04.2002, on the ground that Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, respondent No.2 herein, has raised an objection stating that the plots allotted to the petitioners are earmarked for green belt. Even assuming that the objection is proper, it was too late for the respondents to take any action, since the petitioners have already constructed houses. The averment of the petitioners that the alternative plots allotted to them vide impugned order have in fact been allotted to some third parties remains unrebutted. The petitioners cannot be subjected to repeated harassment like this. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt: 27.01.2011. kdl