IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9118 OF 2011 Between: M/s. Aruna Industries ..... PETITIONER AND A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9118 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was allotted plot Nos.100 to 110 of Industrial Park, Giddaluru, Prakasam District, on 24.07.2010. Within a short time thereafter, the Zonal Manager of the Corporation, 4th respondent, issued proceedings, dated 25.03.2011, cancelling the allotment and requiring the petitioner to handover the plots. The ground mentioned in the order was that though the area earmarked for CFC area, it was allotted to the petitioner by mistake. The same is challenged by the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. It was only in the recent past that the petitioner was allotted plots to an extent of Ac.2-08 in the Industrial Area. In case, there existed any illegality or infirmity in the order of the 4th respondent, the respondents could certainly have issued notice to the petitioner and decide the matter, on consideration of the representation. The 4th respondent assumed to himself several things and passed the impugned order. It is rather unfortunate that an agency which was established for promoting industry is slowly becoming a front office of real estate brokers, and it has become so pliable that whenever an individual or agency needs the land, which is already allotted, unhesitatingly, they will cancel the existing allotment, paving the way for allotment in favour of influential persons or agencies. Unless a serious exercise is undertaken by the respondents, the tarnished image cannot improve in the near future. The impugned order is set aside. It is left open to the 4th respondent to pass fresh order, after issuing notice to the petitioner. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J April 07, 2011 MD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9118 OF 2011 April 07, 2011