IMPORTANT POINT
The exercise of suo moto power under Section 166-B of the Act should be within a reasonable period, and the cancellation of assignment pattas after a long lapse of time is contrary to the law.

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“ ... to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Order No.F3/1873/01/F3/10/Assign/01, dated 20-02-2008 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal, contrary to law and arbitrary ...”

2. Heard Sri P. Girish Kumar, learned senior counsel, representing Sri M. Venkatram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment (Revenue) appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. Learned senior counsel submits that the petitioners are landless poor persons and they have made an application for grant of assignment patta. The then Tahasildar after following the due procedure as contemplated under the Assignment Rules (Loani Rules) contained in G.O.Ms.No.1406 dated 26.07.1958 read with G.O.Ms.No.1724 dated 26.03.1959, granted assignment pattas vide Proceedings No.H1/2537/70 dated 06.06.1970 to an extent of Ac.5.00 gts., of agricultural dry land, each, covered by Sy.No.153 of Gairam of Avancha Village, Narsapur Mandal, Medak District, and since then they have been in possession and enjoyment of the above said property and their names were mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbooks and title deeds were issued. He further submits that the petitioners developed the said land by spending huge amount and labour and dug a bore well and also obtained electricity service connection and doing agriculture and eking out their livelihood. Except the above said land, the petitioners have no other lands.

3.1. While things stood thus, respondent No.1, after lapse of more than 30 years of granting assignment pattas, issued show-cause notice dated 03.03.2001 invoking the provision of Section 166-B of Andhra Pradesh (Telangan) Land Revenue Act, 1317 (for short, ‘the Act’) directing the petitioners to submit explanation as to why the assignment pattas granted in their favour should not be cancelled, on the alleged ground that at the time of granting of assignment pattas, they are minors and on the other ground, the petitioners’ father is an employee working as Attender in Tahasil office, therefore, they are not eligible for grant of assignment pattas. Pursuant to the said show-cause notice, petitioners have submitted detailed explanation on 04.04.2001 denying the allegations made therein, inter alia contending that they are majors and living separately and the then Tahasildar Nasapur after following the due procedure as contemplated under law granted assignment pattas and requested respondent No.1 to drop the proceedings.

3.2. He further submits that during the course of enquiry, the petitioners once again submitted reply on 09.05.2003. Respondent No.1 after lapse of more than five years passed the impugned order dated 20.02.2008 cancelling the assignment pattas of the petitioners without considering the explanation as well as reply submitted by the petitioners dated 04.04.2001 and 09.05.2003 respectively, and the same is contrary to law. He further submits that the petitioners have not violated any assignment patta conditions and respondent No.1 solely basing upon the alleged report submitted by respondent No.3 initiated the proceedings, under the Act, after lapse of more than 30 years and the same is not permissible under law. He also contended that respondent No.1 has not furnished the report submitted by respondent No.3 along with show-cause notice. Further, respondent No.3 has not produced any iota of evidence that the petitioners are minors and also there is no prohibition for grant of assignment in favour of minors.

3.3. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following unreported Judgments passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, as follows:

(i) Chintapalli Yerradu And Others Vs. The Collector, Nizambad And Another (W.P.No.592 of 1964 dated 29.11.1967)

(ii) Som Reddy V. The Joint Collector, Medak And Others (W.P.No.716 of 1980 and batch dated 27.01.1986).

4. Per contr