THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.13262, 13263, 13264, 13265 & 13300 of 2011 Dated 11th October, 2011 Between: Mavuleti Venkateswara Raju and others …Petitioners (W.P.No.13262 of 2011) And The Deputy Director of Fisheries, Machilipatnam, Krishna District and others …Respondents (W.P.No.13262 of 2011) Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Y.Koteswara Rao Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Fisheries Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: This batch of writ petitions raises common grievance of the petitioners. Therefore, they are heard and being disposed of together. The petitioners are owners of agricultural lands. As they intended to convert those lands into fish tanks for carrying on aqua culture, they submitted their applications to the Deputy Director of Fisheries, Machilipatnam, respondent No.1 in all these writ petitions, for grant of permission for carrying on the said activity. Their grievance is that their applications filed in the years 2008 and 2009 are not being disposed of by the competent authority. Even though the cases were adjourned to enable the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Fisheries to report instructions on the status of the petitioners’ applications, so far no instructions are reported. In the absence of any counter affidavit controverting the pleas of the petitioners, this Court has no option other than accepting the plea of the petitioners that they have made their applications for permission and that they are kept pending. The learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the State Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.24, AHDD & F (F.II) Department, dated 09.04.2010, and that following the order of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.550 of 2010 and batch, the State Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.67, AHDD & F (F.II) Department, dated 12.09.2011, incorporating additional conditions, besides those contained in G.O.Ms.No.24, dated 09.04.2010. She has therefore submitted that if the petitioners’ applications are pending, the same will be dealt with in accordance with the said two G.Os. In the opinion of this Court, there can be no justification for the respondents to keep the petitioners’ applications pending even though substantial time has elapsed. In the light of the submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1 to take all necessary measures for disposal of the petitioners’ applications by the competent authority in terms of G.O.Ms.No.24, dated 09.04.2010, and G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 12.09.2011, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petitions, the interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 11th October, 2011 VGB