IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.28596 of 2014 BETWEEN R. Venkataiah.
AND ... PETITIONER The Joint Collector, O/o. The District Collector, Chittoor and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. K. VENUGOPAL REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Petitioner claims that he has been granted DKT patta with respect to land in an extent of Ac.1.69 cents in Sy.No.384/3B of Vedullacheuruvu village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District and that he has been in possession and enjoyment of the land for the last several years. It appears that another DKT patta has been granted in favour of the wife of the petitioner with respect to land in an extent of Ac.1.70 cents in Sy.No.384/2B, which is not subject matter of the present writ petition.
2. Petitioner states that he got temporary appointment as Office Assistant in the Telecom Department in the year 1982, while the patta was granted in the year 1992. At the instance of some third party, it appears that a complaint was made and on the basis of which the Collector, Chittoor District issued impugned notice dated 29.07.2014 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why his assignment should not be cancelled on the ground that he is found ineligible for assignment.
3. The impugned notice, which is stated to have been received by the petitioner on 24.08.2014, is questioned in this writ petition on various grounds including the ground that the petitioner’s father was Sivaijamaidar of the said land since 1978 and petitioner has merely succeeded to the same. Various other grounds are mentioned in the affidavit, however, I am not inclined to go into those questions inasmuch as the petitioner has only been given a show cause notice to submit explanation with respect to the aspects mentioned in the notice. Mere giving of a notice cannot be said to cause any prejudice to the petitioner, as he is at liberty to raise all his contentions and defences in support of the patta granted to him. Since the petitioner states that he has received notice only on 24.08.2014, he be granted further time for submitting explanation.
The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of permitting the petitioner to file an explanation, as mentioned above, within a period of two (2) weeks from today and on filing of such explanation, the first respondent shall consider the same with reference to the records of the case and then take appropriate decision, in the matter, after hearing the petitioner. It is made clear that this Court had not adjudicated upon the merits of the claim of the petitioner and the Joint Collector shall be free to deal with the same and pass appropriate orders in the matter. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 23, 2014 DSK