THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 3674 of 2009 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Roc.D.387/2003 dated 21.1.2009 issued by 2nd respondent and the consequential action of the respondents in insisting the petitioner to vacate from his land of Ac.1-00 cents in Sy.No.1098/1 of Pedavegi village as arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of the provisions of the A.P. Board of Revenue Standing Orders and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India; consequently to direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the said land. According to the petitioner, since he was in possession of Ac.1-00 of land in Sy.No.1098/1 of Pedavegi village and Mandal, West Godavari District, the same was assigned to him in the year 1998 vide L.D. No. 18(a) 1408 dated 30.11.1998 and since then he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same and in fact pattadar passbooks and title deeds were also issued in his name and his name finds place in revenue records. While that being so, on the letter purported to have been addressed by 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent had taken up the said letter as a suo motu appeal and cancelled the assignment made in favour of the petitioner, without putting the petitioner on notice. There is no necessity of going into all the details. Though a counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.2, the fact as to non-issuance of notice to the petitioner is not denied. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 could not assert that the notice was served on the petitioner and he was heard before passing the impugned order. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed dated 21.1.2009 by 2nd respondent is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and on this count alone the impugned order is liable to be set aside. The impugned order dated 21.1.2009 passed by 2nd respondent is accordingly set aside, the writ petition is allowed and the matter is remanded to 2nd respondent for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the petitioner and other concerned persons and to pass appropriate orders after hearing them, as per law. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 02-11-2009. MVB.