IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 9728 of 2002 Between: 1 Vanamadi Krishna, S/o Gurayya, Ramanaiah Peta Village, Suryapeta, Kakinada Rural Mandal, E.G.District. 2 Angadi Vishnu, s/o Subba Rao, R/o Ramanaiapet Village, Suryapeta, Kakinada Rurual Mandal, E.G.District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 A.P. Bhoodan Yagna Board,Gandhi Bhavan, Rep. by its Chairman Exhibition Grounds, Hyderabad. 2 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue any order or orders or Direction mainly in nature of Writ of Prohibition or any other Writ or order by declaring the action of Respondent No.1 (Bhoodan Yagna Board) in alloting the land to third parties without giving the proper opportunity to the Petitioners as illegal, contrary to law and violative of principles of natural justice and didrect the Respondents not to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.A.ANASUYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.V.HARI HARAN The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI W.P.NO.9728 OF 2001 ORAL ORDER The first petitioner herein was allotted Ac.2.79 cents of land situated in Sy.Nos.110 and 192/6 of Surryaraopet Village by the 1st respondent-A.P. Bhoodan Yagna Board. Similarly the 2nd petitioner was allotted to an extent of Ac.2.22 cents situated in Sy.Nos.278/13 and 192/6 of Ramanaiahpet Village. It is stated that since then they have been in possession and enjoyment of the said land by cultivating the same. While so, the 1st respondent issued a notice dated.22-02-2002 calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why the allotment of the lands in their favour should not be cancelled alleging that the petitioners had leased out the said lands to one Venkata Nagendra Satyanarayana Murthy for a period of ten(10) years contrary to the terms and conditions of the allotment. It is stated that the petitioners submitted their explanations denying the allegations. Though no further orders have been passed, apprehending that the 1st respondent may allot the land in their possession to third parties without considering their explanations, the petitioners filed this writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the 1st respondent is arbitrary and illegal. This Court by order dated.21-05-2002 while directing rule nisi granted interim direction not to dispossess the petitioners from the land in question. No counter-affidavit is filed by the respondents sofar and the interim order continued in operation all through. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. Though it is contended by the petitioners that the alleged violation of the terms and conditions of allotment is incorrect and without any basis, since the 1st respondent has not yet passed any order pursuant to the show cause notice dated.22-02-2002 it is neither necessary nor proper for this Court to express any opinion on merits. Instead, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the explanations submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to them. Till such order is passed, the respondents shall not interfere with the possession of the petitioners in respect of the land in question in any manner what-so-ever. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI,J 19th November,2008 *TSNR