Vijayawada: A sharp divide surfaced in the Cabinet on Thursday over whether to cancel unused house sites allotted to the poor under the YSRCP government’s Jagananna Colonies scheme, triggering an intense debate on political risk, legality and administrative feasibility.

Several ministers argued that construction had taken place on only 40-50 per cent of the allotted plots and urged the government to cancel titles for the remaining vacant sites and reassign them to new beneficiaries. They reminded the Cabinet of the TDP’s pre-poll promise to provide three cents of house site to the poor in every village.

However, the proposal immediately met resistance. Agriculture minister K Atchannaidu and a senior official reportedly warned that the YSRCP government had already registered titles in beneficiaries’ names, making cancellations legally difficult and politically fraught. Ministers opposing the move argued that many beneficiaries did not build houses because plots were far from habitations, or certain sites were unsuitable for construction, and that cancelling titles could trigger public anger.

Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu, intervening in the debate, suggested issuing notices to non-constructing beneficiaries to determine whether they still intend to build. He reportedly said cancellations could be considered only if beneficiaries clearly decline or fail to respond, but cautioned the Cabinet to avoid hasty action.

Some ministers insisted on immediate cancellation, while others pressed for a comprehensive inquiry, urging the formation of an officers’ committee to examine legal, social, and land-use implications before final decisions. The previous government had distributed 30.76 lakh one-cent house sites to the poor.

The Cabinet also revisited the contentious issue of the Rishikonda government buildings in Visakhapatnam, constructed during the YSRCP regime at a cost of around 500 crore.. Ministers argued that large public assets cannot remain idle indefinitely. The Chief Minister reportedly questioned why the Cabinet sub-committee formed earlier had not submitted its report.

Discussions included the possibility of handing the buildings over to a major hotel group, but ministers acknowledged ongoing legal obstacles, including a High Court-appointed committee reviewing the matter. The Cabinet agreed to act only after receiving the sub-committee’s report and addressing legal requirements.

The Chief Minister is also learned to have expressed displeasure that ministers were not monitoring whether industries allotted government land in their districts had actually commenced operations. He reportedly directed district in-charge ministers to ensure immediate progress at project sites and maintain continuous follow-up. Sources said the Chief Minister also conveyed dissatisfaction over some ministers arriving late to the Cabinet meeting.