1. A notice was issued for the cancellation of land assignment pattas, prompting a challenge against the administrative action regarding the subject property. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 37989
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Subba Reddy Satti, J
N. Chinna Bidamma – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 30501/2026
Important Points
The court held that the principles of natural justice must be followed by administrative authorities, requiring them to provide a fair hearing and consider the petitioner's explanation and documents before cancelling a land assignment (DKT Patta).
Subject
Civil - Land Revenue
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Natural Justice - Cancellation of Land Assignment - Right to be heard - The administrative authority is required to consider the explanation and afford an opportunity of hearing to the patta holder before proceeding with the cancellation of the assignment. (Para 8)
(B) Administrative Action - Procedural Fairness - Show Cause Notice - Ensuring that the party affected by a show cause notice can submit relevant documents and be heard personally is essential to prevent arbitrary administrative action. (Para 7, 8)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to an opportunity of hearing and submission of explanation before the cancellation of the DKT Patta.
(B) Administrative Action - Procedural Fairness - Show Cause Notice - Ensuring that the party affected by a show cause notice can submit relevant documents and be heard personally is essential to prevent arbitrary administrative action. (Para 7, 8)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to an opportunity of hearing and submission of explanation before the cancellation of the DKT Patta.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P Jagadish Chandra Prasad
For the Respondents: GP for Revenue, Divya Teja
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P Jagadish Chandra Prasad
For the Respondents: GP for Revenue, Divya Teja
Table of Contents
2. The petitioner challenged the show-cause notice as arbitrary and lacking substantive basis, while the respondents maintained that statutory procedures for cancellation are being followed. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 )
3. The court observed that the authority should consider the petitioner's explanation, provided it is supported by relevant documents, before finalizing the cancellation proceedings. (Para 7 , 8 )
4. Administrative authorities must grant an opportunity of hearing and consider the explanation of the noticee prior to passing final orders on the cancellation of land assignments. (Para 8 )
5. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction for the petitioner to submit an explanation to the authority, who shall decide after providing a hearing. (Para 8 )
6. Is a show-cause notice for the cancellation of land assignments subject to judicial intervention without exhausting administrative remedies?
The court determined that the appropriate and efficient course is to allow the petitioner to submit an explanation to the issuing authority, who is bound to consider it and provide a hearing before passing final orders. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 )
7. What protection is afforded to a petitioner during the pendency of cancellation proceedings regarding assigned land?
Pending the submission and adjudication of the explanation by the authority, the court directed the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land. (Para 8 )
##PAGE1##
APHC010546572026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3331]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE 16th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 30501/2026 Between:
1. N . CHINNA BIDAMMA, W/O. N. SREENIVASULU REDDY, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. GOLLAPALLI, PACHIGUNTA, GANGADHARA NELLORE MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-517125.
...PETITIONER AND
1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P.
SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238
2. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT CHITTOOR-
517002
3. T HE JOINT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT O/O DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR-517002
4. T HE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHITTOOR REVENUE DIVISION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT CHITTOOR-517001
5. T HE TAHSILDAR, GANGADHARA NELLORE MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT-517125 ...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of Respondents, more particularly the Respondent No.3, in issuing Notice Roc.No.L4/e-106/2026 dated 20.08.2026, thereby calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the DKT Patta granted to her in respect of (i) Sy.No.39/10 of an extent of Ac.0.20 cents, (ii) Sy.No.39/3A of an extent of Ac. 0.25 cents, (iii) Sy. No. 22/11 of an extent of Ac.0.37 cents and (iv) Sy. No. 22/10 of an extent of Ac.0.19 cents, totaling Ac.1.01 cents, of Pachigunta Village, Gangadhara Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District should not be cancelled, on the strength of a report of the Respondent No.4 which has never been furnished to the petitioner and without any survey of the subject property as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, unconstitutional and being violative of articles 14, 21 and 300(A) of the constitution of India and in violation of principles of natural justice, and consequently direct the respondents to furnish the report and the material relied upon, to conduct an independent, fair and joint survey of the subject property after notice to the petitioner, and not to interfere in the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Notice Roc. No. L4/e-106/2026 dated 20.08.2026 issued by the Respondent No.3, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property i.e. (i) Sy.No.39/10 of an extent of Ac.0.20 cents, (ii) Sy.No.39/3A of an extent of Ac.0.25 cents, (iii) Sy.No.22/11 of an extent of Ac.0.37 cents and (iv) Sy.No.22/10 of an extent of Ac.0.19 cents, totalling Ac.1.01 cents, of Pachigunta Village, Gangadhara Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
##PAGE2##1. P JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S):
##PAGE3##1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order:
Heard Sri P.Jagadish Chandra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Divya Teja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 5.
2. Assailing the notice issued by the 3rd respondent vide R.O.C.No.L4/e-
106/2026 dated 20.08.2026 (Ex.P5), the above writ petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the then Tahsildar assigned land to the petitioner to an extent of Ac.0.20 cents in Sy.No.39/
