THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI W.P.No.8864 of 2011 Between: 1. Smt. N. Dhanalakshmi and others PETITIONERS And 1. The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Panchayat Bhavan, Hyderguda, Hyderabad, and others. RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Thata Singaiah Goud Counsel for the respondent No.1: G.P. for PR & RD Counsel for respondents 2 and 3: Smt. Ch. Vedavani Court made the following ORDER: The petitioners were allotted shops by the 3rd respondent-Gram Panchayat for a period of three years on rental basis. The period expired on 31.03.2011. In the meanwhile, the Gram Panchayat appears to have passed Resolution No.79, dated 23.12.2010 superceding its earlier resolution to conduct auction of the leasehold rights in respect of the said shops for a period of three years from 2011-2012 to 2013-2014. The 3rd respondent-Gram Panchayat, however, issued auction notice dated 3.03.2011 calling for tenders only for the year 2011-2012. Aggrieved by the said notification, the petitioners filed W.P.No.6384 of 2011 and this Court after noticing that the resolution of the Gram Panchayat was to auction the leasehold rights for a period of three years directed to conduct auction strictly in accordance with the said resolution. It appears that in pursuance of the said orders no action has been taken, but in the meanwhile, the petitioners approached the 3rd respondent-Gram Panchayat seeking extension of their lease by enhancing the rent for a period of three years. As there was no response from the 3rd respondent-Gram Panchayat, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking a direction to consider the said representation by passing appropriate orders. The 3rd respondent has filed counter affidavit inter alia stating that the Gram Panchayat passed a fresh Resolution No.88 dated 22.03.2011 to conduct auction only for a period of one year i.e., 1.04.2011 to 31.3.2012. Thus the resolution, dated 23.12.2010 in pursuance of which a decision was taken to conduct auction for a period of three years, stood superceded by virtue of the fresh resolution dated 22.03.2011. In view of the same, the petitioners, who were admittedly inducted as tenants only for a period of three years, are not entitled to insist for auctioning the leasehold rights for a period of three years. It is true that the petitioners have made a representation seeking extension on enhancement of rent. This Court cannot give a positive direction in that regard. It is however made clear that the 3rd respondent is at liberty to consider the said representation and take appropriate decision. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. No costs. _________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 5th August, 2011. Js. Note: Issue C.C. in 2 days.