THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.19537 of 2011 Dated 09th August, 2011 Between: Katari Chakravarthy Raju and others …Petitioners And The Deputy Director Fisheries-cum-Convenor, District Level Committee, Eluru, West Godavari District and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri N.Vidya Prasad Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: AGP for Fisheries Counsel for respondent Nos.4 & 5: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not according protection to the petitioners from interference by the third parties with their fishing activity being undertaken in pursuance of the permission granted by the respondents for conversion of agricultural lands into fish tanks as illegal and arbitrary. From a perusal of the pleadings of the petitioners, it is quite evident that their grievance is that despite the permission granted by the respondents for conversion of agricultural lands into fish tanks, certain third parties, who are the neighbouring land owners, are creating hurdles to them by unduly interfering with the petitioners’ activities. The petitioners expect the respondents to keep those intruders at bay by taking appropriate measures. In the opinion of this Court, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed for two reasons. Firstly, the petitioners failed to name and implead the persons, who are allegedly interfering with their right to carry on fishing activities in their lands. In the absence of those persons, it is not appropriate for this Court to grant any relief, which is likely to affect their interests. Secondly, the petitioners have availed a wrong remedy. If any private individual is seeking to interfere with the petitioners’ activity of running fish ponds, they are entitled to avail common law remedy of a civil suit by approaching the competent Court of civil jurisdiction. Unless an order or a decree by the civil Court is granted, it is not possible for the respondents to protect the petitioners from the alleged interference by the third parties. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent civil Court for appropriate relief against the third parties, who are allegedly interfering with their fishing activity. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.23618 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 09th August, 2011 VGB