THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28443 OF 2011 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the proceedings of the first respondent in C.C.No.87/KVR/75 dated 25.07.2011, in cancelling the pattadar pass books and title deeds as well as the certificates in Forms-13-B and 13-C in respect of Ac.14-00 of dry land in Survey No.31 of Mudhivarthi Village, Vidavalur Mandal, Nellore District, and in accepting the surrender of the said land towards holding of the deceased husband of the third respondent without putting the petitioners on notice and without providing them an opportunity as prescribed under Rule 7 (5) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Rules, 1974, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioners, two in number, claim to be the absolute owners of an extent of Ac.7-00 of land each in Survey No.31. They claim to have purchased the lands which, according to them, have been regularized, and pattadar pass books and title deeds have been issued in their favour. They claim to have raised mango and oil palm trees on the said land. While matters stood thus, the first respondent passed the impugned order dated 25.07.2011 accepting the lands, which the petitioners claim to be owners of, as surplus lands of the husband of the third respondent. It is the petitioners’ specific case that no notice was served on them. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Andhra and Rayalaseema Areas) was directed to produce the record. On perusal of the record it is noticed that, on the plea that the petitioners were not residents of the village, notices are said to have been affixed on a pole fixed over the land. Learned Counsel for the petitioners would draw attention of this Court to the impugned proceedings whereunder several such persons are said to have been served in the same manner. He would state that this method has been resorted to by the official respondents only to avoid service of notice on the petitioners herein. While this submission of the Learned Counsel is not without merit, I do not consider it appropriate to adjudicate this question, as ends of justice would be met if the impugned order is set aside; copies of the notices said to have been affixed on the pole are now served on the petitioners herein; the petitioners are given an opportunity of being heard; and an order passed afresh in accordance with law. Learned Government Pleader has handed over copies of the notices to the Learned Counsel for the petitioners, which the latter acknowledges receipt of, and waives the requirement of service of notice afresh on the petitioners. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of setting aside the impugned order on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. As the petitioners have now been served with a notice through their counsel, they are permitted to submit their objections thereto within two weeks from today. In case objections are filed within the aforesaid period of two weeks, the first respondent shall then consider the objections, and take action in accordance with law. It is made clear that, in case objections are not filed within the said period of two weeks, the impugned order shall revive and it would be open to the first respondent to take consequential action in accordance with law thereafter. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J November 03, 2011 Note: Issue C.C. by 09.11.2011. B/O.MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28443 OF 2011 November 03, 2011 MD