THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11702 of 2008 ORDER: Although the matter is listed under the caption ‘interlocutory’, at the request of the learned counsel for both the parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and being disposed of by this order. In the writ petition, petitioner questioned notice, dated 23.05.2008 issued in Roc.A/494/2008 by the second respondent – Tahsildar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District. The petitioner is an ex-serviceman. As per Board Standing Orders, patta in D-Form was issued in his favour in respect of land to an extent of Acs.3.20 cents covered by Survey No.72/1 of Venkappakota Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District. On the ground that the above said piece of land is required for construction of houses to the needy persons of Madanapalle Town, the impugned notice was issued to the petitioner calling for his explanation as to why the land allotted to him shall not be resumed for using the same for public purpose. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents have already decided to take back the land in question, as evident from the impugned notice, as such, submitting his explanation to such notice would become an empty formality. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by the respondents. In the said counter-affidavit, it is stated that the impugned notice was issued as per the conditions of grant and the petitioner has already submitted his explanation, in which, he has requested not to dispossess him from the land in question. Although it is submitted that the respondents have already decided to resume the land in question, the provisional conclusion as mentioned in the impugned notice cannot be a determinative factor for the purpose of resumption. The impugned notice is in the nature of a show cause notice inviting explanation from the petitioner. As the petitioner has already submitted his explanation to such notice, it is for the respondents to examine the objections raised by him therein before passing appropriate orders. Further, as the assignment made to the petitioner is not in dispute, there is no reason to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the land in question at this point of time. As much as final orders are not yet passed and the petitioner has already submitted his explanation to the impugned notice, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to pass appropriate final orders in the matter by considering the objections raised by the petitioner in the explanation submitted by him pursuant to the impugned notice. There shall be a further direction to the respondents that till such final orders are communicated to the petitioner, no steps shall be taken by them to dispossess him from the land in question. It is made clear that if the petitioner wants to submit further explanation, it is open to him to do so, within a period of four (4) weeks from today. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 18th JULY, 2011. kvni