THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31900 of 2010 Date: 20.12.2010 Between: The Fishermen Co-operative Society, Pembatla Village, Karimnagar ..... Petitioner AND The Commissioner of Fisheries, Hyderabad and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Bollepalli Sai Ram Goud Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Assistant Government Pleader for Fisheries Counsel for Respondent No.5: Sri P. Raghavendra Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the proceedings dated 21.10.2010 of respondent No.4, whereby the administrative control of Ooracheruvu of Pembatla Village, Sarangapur Mandal, has been transferred from the Fisheries Department to that of the Gram Panchayt, Pembatla. I have heard Sri Bollepalli Sai Ram Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner is a Fishermen Cooperative Society, which is being granted fisheries rights over the abovementioned tank. Under the impugned order, respondent No.4 has transferred the administrative control of the said tank on the ground that ayacut of the said tank is less than 100 acres i.e., Acs.72.38 guntas and that therefore, its control is being transferred to the Gram Panchayat in pursuance of the approval on note file by respondent No.2 on 11.10.2010. Simultaneously, respondent No.4 has directed in the impugned order that the leasehold rights of fishing in the tank for the year 2010-11 shall be given to the petitioner’s society in accordance with Government Orders in force. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the impugned order is illegal and without jurisdiction. I do not find any merit in the submission of the learned counsel for two reasons, namely, (i) that the learned counsel has not drawn the attention of this Court to any provision of law which is contravened by the impugned order and (ii) that notwithstanding the transfer of administration of the tank, the petitioner’s interests are safeguarded by respondent No.4, who has directed that the petitioner shall be granted leasehold rights in accordance with the Government orders. In view of this direction, no cause arises for the petitioner to question the administrative decision of respondent No.4. So long as the petitioner’s interests are protected, it is immaterial for it as to whether the administrative control vests in the Fisheries Department or in the Gram Panchayat concerned. For the aforementioned reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.40553 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 20th December, 2010 GHN