IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23325 of 2011 Between: Neelii Ravindra Prasada Babu … Petitioner And The Govt., of A.P., rep., by its Principle Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V. Narayana Reddy Counsel for respondents 1&2: AGP for Municipal Administration Counsel for respondent No.3: Sri B. Hanumantha Rao This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23325 of 2011 ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceedings, dated 19.04.2011, of respondent No.2 and memo, dated 24.10.2007, of respondent No.1. The petitioner claims that he was the highest bidder for collecting fees from the vendors selling the products in Dycus Road Municipal Market, Nellore, for the year 2001-02. It is the case of the petitioner that on 31.03.2006 auction was conducted for collection of fees in the market and that he has offered the highest amount of Rs.4 lakhs, but the auction proceedings did not fructify. In this Writ Petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that in pursuance of memo, dated 24.10.2007 of respondent No.1, respondent No.2 has issued proceedings, dated 19.04.2011, directing respondent No.3 to implement memo, dated 24.10.2007 of respondent No.1 by allotting the shop rooms/sheds on lease to the highest bidder by conducting public auction among the fishermen community/society by following the procedure in vogue to encourage the fishermen folk to earn their livelihood. According to the petitioner, under Section 534 (c) of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”), the shop rooms/sheds shall be put to public auction and that memo, dated 24.10.2007, and the direction given by respondent No.2 to respondent No.3 vide his proceedings, dated 19.04.2011, run counter to the said provision. In my opinion, the petitioner seems to be labouring under confusion with regard to the subject matter covered by the two impugned proceedings. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioner that he is interested in taking the shop rooms/shed in the market on lease for carrying on business. It is his specific case that for the year 2001- 02 and also for the year 2006, he offered the highest bid amount for collecting fees in the market. Therefore, the petitioner has nothing to do with leasing of shop rooms/sheds in the market and accordingly he has no locus to question the proceedings issued by respondent Nos.1 and 2, which are impugned in this Writ Petition. Be that as it may, as held by a Division Bench of this Court by its order, dated 06.06.2006, in Nellore Fisher Workwomen Cooperative Society, Nellore vs. N. Ravi Prasad Babu & others[1] Section 534 (c) of the Act confers discretion upon the Commissioner to grant lease either by public auction or by private sale subject to the approval of the Standing Committee and that such a discretion of respondent No.2 cannot be curtailed by giving a direction to conduct only public auction. This ratio squarely applies to this case. A perusal of memo, dated 24.10.2007, issued by respondent No.1 would show that in order to encourage the fishermen community, it has envisaged auction among the members of that community while allotting shop rooms/sheds on lease in the fish market run by respondent No.2. Any interference by this Court with such policy decision of respondent No.1 would only cause harm to the interest of the fishermen community. For the abovementioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.28546 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 18.08.2011 ES [1] Writ Appeal No.541 of 2006