IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.26302 of 2005 Between: Nakrekanti Chandraiah and 2 others ..... PETITIONERS AND Joint Collector and Addl.Dist.Magistrate, Nalgonda and 4 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.26302 of 2005 O R D E R: It is the case of the petitioners that the father of the 1st petitioner was assigned an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Sy.No.681 of Itipamula village of Kattangur Mandal, Nalgonda District vide Dis.No.3426/B2/61 by the then Tahsildar, Nalgonda. Similarly, the father of the 3rd petitioner i.e. husband of the 2nd petitioner was also assigned an extent of Ac.2.08 cents in Sy.Nos.681, 682, 683 of the same village vide Dis.No.3427/B2/61 dated 18.04.1961. The total extent of both the assignments is Ac.4.58 cents. Out of Ac.4.58 cents, it is stated that an extent of Ac.3.04 cents was cancelled on the ground that the husband of the 4th respondent herein purchased the said land on 23.06.1978. As against the said orders of the Mandal Revenue Officer dated ….11.1997 the petitioners herein filed appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda vide orders in G/653/97 dated 12.04.1999 came to the conclusion that the Mandal Revenue Officer while cancelling the assignment of land granted in favour of the petitioners herein, has not issued any notice and accordingly, the Revenue Divisional Officer allowed the appeal. As against the said orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 12.04.1999 the respondents Nos.4 and 5 filed further appeal under Sec.4-A of the A.P.Land Lands (Prohibition & Transfer) Act 1955 and the Joint Collector by the impugned orders dated 16.07.2004 in Proceedings No.F2/JC/Assn./13/2002 set aside the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed. There is no dispute that the Mandal Revenue Officer while cancelling the assignment of the land granted in favour of the petitioners herein, no notice was given to them giving reasonable opportunity of being heard. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Revenue Divisional Officer as well as the Joint Collector ought to have remanded the matter to the original authority without going into the merits of the case with regard to the validity or otherwise of the sale deeds and their respective claims. I am of the opinion that the order passed by the original authority cancelling the assignment is without notice to the petitioners herein. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this writ petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, the impugned orders are set aside, remitting the matter back to the 3rd respondent- Mandal Revenue Offier, Kattangur Mandal to decide the matter afresh, after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioners herein as well as respondents Nos.4 and 5 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 24.02.2011 Dsr