IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 2735 of 2003 Between: Sri Uma Ramalingeswara Devasthanam, Rep. by its Chairman, Pedda Venkanna Dora, Nemam, Kakinada Rural Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 District Collector., East Godavari District., Kakinada. East Godavari District. 2 The District Panchayat Officer, East Godavari District., Kakinada. East Godavari District. 3 Namem Grampanchayat, Rep. by its Secretary. Kakinada Rural Mandal, East Godavari District. 4 Nemam Fishermen Multipurpose Co-operative Society, Rep. by its President.V. Suryanarayana. Nemam, Kakinada Rural Mandal, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order Roc.no.3638/2002 A3, dated 20-12-2002 passed by the 1st respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the interests of the petitioner- Devasthanam. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. E.V.V.S.RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.2735 OF 2003 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the order passed by the 1st respondent – District Collector – dated, 20.12.2002 directing the petitioner Devasthanam to hand over the tank situated in RS.No.144 of Neman Village to the 3rd respondent Gram Panchayat as arbitrary and illegal. Admittedly the tank in question vested in the 3rd respondent Gram Panchayat. It appears that on the basis of a request made by the petitioner Devasthanam the 3rd respondent Gram Panchayat passed a resolution dated 27.1.2001 to alienate the tank in question to the petitioner Devasthanam for the benefit of the devotees and accordingly permission of the District Collector was sought. Having considered the same, the District Collector granted permission for alienating the tank in question and accordingly the District Panchayat Officer vide proceedings dated 26.5.2001 informed the same to the 3rd respondent Gram panchayat. It is not in dispute that pursuant thereto the tank in question was handed over to the petitioner Devasthanam. Aggrieved by the same, the 4th respondent which is a Fishermen Multipurpose Co-operative Society filed W.P.No.15364 of 2002 contending inter alia that the alienation in favour of the petitioner herein is arbitrary and illegal and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. This Court, after hearing both the parties, disposed of the said writ petition leaving it open to the petitioner therein (4th respondent herein) to make a representation to the District Collector and the District Panchayat Officer bringing to their notice if there is any violation of the statutory provisions. If any such representation is made, the same shall be considered within two weeks. Thereafter, the fourth respondent appears to have made a representation and on the basis of the same the impugned order dated 20.12.2002 came to be passed holding as under : “In view of the above, and in compliance with the judgment delivered in W.P.No.15364 of 2002, dated 20.08.2002 of the Hon’ble High Court of A.P., Hyderabad the tank in S.No.144 with an extent of 3-91 cents vested in Nemam Gram Panchayat and alienated in favour of Uma Ramalingeswara Swamy Devastanam, Nemam earlier is hereby ordered to be given back to gram panchayat. The Panchayat Secretary, Nemam Gram Panchayat and Sarpanch Nemam Gram Pachayat are hereby directed to take necessary further action to leaseout to usufruct of fishing rights in this said tank situated in Survey No.144 with an extent of 3.91 cents following procedure laid down as per the relevant standing orders of the Government in force, immediately and report compliance forthwith.” Challenging the said order, the present writ petition is filed. Though this Court initially granted interim suspension for a period of six weeks, the said order was not extended subsequently. The tank in question was handed over to the 3rd respondent Gram Panchayat and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent society states that the same has been leased out to the society and it has been enjoying the leasehold rights as on today. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record as well as the counter-affidavits filed by the respondents 3 and 4. At the outset, it is to be noted that while disposing of W.P.No.15364 of 2002 this Court categorically held that the 4th respondent society cannot have any say in the matter, except to the extent of complaining about infraction of any statutory provision. It was also observed by this Court that there is no provision in the statute prohibiting the Gram Panchayat or the respondents 1 and 2 from alienating the tanks vested in the Gram panchayat in favour of any other agency. However, since no infraction was complained by the petitioner therein (4th respondent herein), this Court granted liberty to the 4th respondent herein to make an appropriate representation before the District Collector. Accordingly, the 4th respondent society made a representation. Having received the same, the 1st respondent is required to make an enquiry and record a finding on the issue whether the alienations in favour of the petitioner Devasthanam were in violation of any statutory provision. Surprisingly, the 1st respondent did not go into the said question at all but merely held that this Court directed the petitioner Devasthanam to hand over the tank in question to the Gram Panchayat. There is no basis for the said conclusion of the 1st respondent since this Court never recorded any finding as such and there was no direction in W.P.No.15364 of 2002 to hand over the tank in question to the Gram Panchayat. In the circumstances, the impugned order which is not in conformity with the order of this Court in W.P.No.15364 of 2002, is hereby set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider the issue after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner Devasthanam, 4th respondent society as well as the 3rd respondent Gram panchayat and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Till such time, status quo obtaining as on today as to the possession of the tank in question shall be maintained. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 24.11.2008 gbs