THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.1732 and 2143 of 2005 COMMON ORDER: In view of common questions arise for consideration, both the writ petitions are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. In both the writ petitions, petitioners are seeking to quash the order, dated 03.12.2004, passed by the first respondent – Special Grade Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Vizag Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam District, in proceedings bearing Rc.No.1064/87.RI, and to declare the action of the respondents in demolishing their structures existed in plot Nos.2125, 2129, 2123, 2126, 2128, and the plot of 96 sq.yards in between plot Nos.2129, 2128 and the Common Septic Tank, respectively, situated in Rehabilitation Colony, Vadlapudi, Gajuwaka Mandal, as illegal. It is the case of the petitioners that they were displaced persons under the proceedings initiated for acquisition of their plots for the purpose of Vizag Steel Plant. It is stated that a Rehabilitation Scheme was introduced for providing jobs and allotment of house sites to the affected persons. It is also stated that after conducting enquiry, Rehabilitation Cards were issued to the affected persons. In W.P.No.1732 of 2005, the first and second petitioners and the third petitioner’s grandfather, by name, Sri Godi Vadapalli, were issued ‘R’ Card Nos.285, 284 and 759 respectively. It is stated that pursuant to the issuance of such cards, at the first instance, three plots were allotted to the petitioners but subsequently, on their request, the first respondent issued the revised proceedings in Rc.No.1064/86/87, dated …/05/90 allotting plot Nos.2125, 2129 and 2123, admeasuring 107 sq.yards each, in favour of the first and second petitioners and the third petitioner’s grand father. In W.P.No.2143 of 2005, the first and second petitioners were allotted plot Nos.2126 and 2128 respectively and the third petitioner’s mother, by name, Smt. Mortha Seethamma, was allotted plot in an extent of 96 sq.yards situated in between plot Nos.2129, 2128 and the Common Septic Tank, in Vadlapudi Rehabilitation Colony, Vadlapudi, Gajuwaka Mandal, vide proceedings in Rc.No.1064/87/SO/R1, dated 26.03.1992, issued by the first respondent. It is the grievance of the petitioners that although they are in possession of the plots allotted to them by raising thatched houses, all of a sudden, on 04.12.2004, respondents 1 and 2 forcefully dispossessed them from their respective plots and removed the structures raised thereon. It is stated that the petitioners came to know that their allotment proceedings were cancelled by the first respondent through order, dated 03.12.2004, passed in proceedings bearing Rc.No.1064/87.RI, but the said order was not served on them and that they were not given any opportunity of hearing before passing such order. In such circumstance, they filed these writ petitions. It is also stated that apprehending their filing of the writ petitions, the first respondent filed Caveat Petitions before this Court. A counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. In the counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations of the petitioners, the respondents have admitted that the petitioners were displaced persons and were issued Rehabilitation Cards. It is averred that though the petitioners were allotted aforesaid plots, they have not constructed any houses thereon and on enquiry, it was found that some other persons occupied the plots and constructed thatched houses to grab the same. The respondents have admitted that the petitioners were paid compensation for acquiring their dwelling houses for steel plant purpose and were allotted house-sites based on the ‘R’ Cards issued to them. It is further averred that the petitioners are not residing in the plots allotted to them for construction of houses and some unauthorized persons made constructions by encroaching the same. It is also averred that the show cause notices were issued to the petitioners before cancellation of allotment orders and since they were not residing in the village, such show cause notices were affixed at the plots on 16.11.2004 and as no explanation was submitted, final orders were passed on 03.12.2004 in Rc.No.1064/87.R1 and vacant possession of the plots was taken over. In view of the same, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. Heard Sri Dammalapati Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.5 – Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation. It is submitted by Sri Dammalapati Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were displaced persons and they were issued ‘R’ Cards, based on which, plots were allotted to them. It is further submitted that in spite of the fact that the petitioners constructed thatched houses on the aforesaid plots, they were dispossessed and the structures thereon were removed illegally on 03.12.2004 without giving them any opportunity. It is also submitted that repeated enquiries were conducted with regard to issuance of ‘R’ Cards and as it was confirmed therein that the petitioners are genuine displaced persons, the aforesaid plots were allotted to them. In spite of the same, they were dispossessed illegally and arbitrarily without giving any opportunity. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondents 1 to 3 that the aforesaid plots were allotted to the petitioners for construction of houses but they have not utilized the same for that purpose and that in spite of issuance of show cause notices, there was no reply, as such, final orders were passed cancelling the allotment orders passed in favour of the petitioners. It is also submitted that the very object of the Scheme is for allotment of plots to the displaced persons to enable them to construct dwelling houses and as the third parties were found in possession of the plots allotted to the petitioners, the impugned order was passed cancelling the earlier allotments. On the other hand, Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the fifth respondent, submitted that the plots, which were given temporary custody to the fifth respondent, are still vacant and not allotted to any third parties. When the matters came up for hearing on the last occasion, on 05.08.2010, they were adjourned to enable the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition to produce the order, dated 03.12.2004, as well as the relevant record, before this Court. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition has produced before this Court the order, dated 03.12.2004, along with the record. I have perused the material filed along with the writ petition including the affidavits filed in support of the Caveat Petitions filed by the first respondent. At the outset, it is to be noticed that in the affidavits filed in support of the Caveat Petitions, it is stated that with regard to the house-site plots, one Sri Godi Mahalakshmi, Son of Pydaiah of Vadlapudi Village, fraudulently obtained ‘R’ Card and house sites in the name of his family members, as such, proceedings were initiated for cancellation of allotment orders and accordingly, orders were passed on 03.12.2004. It appears, the said proceedings were initiated based on the clippings, published in Andhra Jyothi Telugu Daily Newspaper, that Sri Godi Mahalaxmi obtained ‘R’ Cards and secured the house plots illegally and fraudulently. I have also perused the order, dated 03.12.2004, passed by the first respondent in proceedings bearing Rc.No.1064/87 RI. As stated in the affidavits filed in support of the writ petitions, the impugned order was not placed on record for the reason that it was not served on them. It is evident from a reading of the impugned order itself that the house-sites were allotted to the petitioners based on the ‘R’ Cards issued to them, but, as per the report of the Executive Staff, it was found that the said plots were under encroachment. With reference to the aforesaid ground and the clippings published in Andhra Jyothi Telugu Daily Newspaper on 30.11.2004, allotments were cancelled recording a finding that in spite of issuance of show cause notice, no explanation was submitted by the petitioners. A perusal of the proceedings relating to the impugned order shows that no attempts have been made by the respondents to serve notices on the petitioners by sending to their known addresses. According to the impugned order, the show cause notices were served by way of substituted service in the locality. In the absence of any attempt to serve notices on the petitioners in person, there appears no reason at all, at the first instance, to serve notice by way of substituted service. Even according to the respondents, the petitioners were not residing at the sites and third parties were found in possession of the same. Further, it is to be noticed that no conditions seem to have been imposed while allotting the plots for construction of houses in a particular time. In the absence of such conditions, merely the said sites were not utilized for construction of houses is no ground to cancel the allotments. Even in the impugned order, there is no reference to any of such conditions except stating that there is encroachment by some third parties. Even assuming so, such encroachment by itself is also no ground to cancel the allotment orders unless a finding is recorded to the effect that if any condition imposed at the time of allotment of house-sites is violated by the allottees. From the perusal of the impugned order, the affidavits filed in support of the Caveat Petitions and the averments in the counter- affidavit, it is clear that very casually and lightheartedly, the matter was dealt with and without any reason and justification, merely referring to paper clippings, hurriedly, the impugned order has been passed without giving any opportunity to the petitioners. As it is admitted in the counter-affidavit that petitioners are the displaced persons and were issued ‘R’ Cards, unless there exists a valid reason for cancellation of allotments, no such cancellation is permissible. In view of the same, very action of the first respondent in proceeding to cancel the allotments by merely making an attempt to serve notice only by substituted service, without resorting to any other means, is nothing short of arbitrary exercise of power and grossly illegal. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the view that the petitioners are deprived of the plots allotted to them illegally and arbitrarily. In that view of the matter, the writ petitions are allowed and the order, dated 03.12.2004, issued in Rc.No.1064/87.RI, is hereby quashed so far as the petitioners are concerned, with a direction to the respondents to restore the plots to them by conducting a panchanama within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As the petitioners were dragged to this Court by the respondents unnecessarily, it is evidently a fit case to impose costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) payable by the first respondent to the petitioners of each writ petition, within a period of six (6) weeks from today. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2010. kvni