IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6346 of 2009 Between: A. Mutyala Rao, S/o. A. Rama Rao, R/o. Toleru Village, Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of A.P. Rep by its Secretary, Fisheries Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Narsapuram, West Godavari District. 3 Toleru Gram Panchayat, Rep by its Secretary, Village Secretariat, Toleru, Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District. ....RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings bearing NO. 89/2009/A dated 02-3-2009 issued by the respondent No. 2 and the consequential proceedings bearing Rc.No. 14/2009 dated 03-3-2009 issued by the respondent No. 3 as illegal and ultra vires to the provisions of Article 14 and 300-A of the constitution of India and also in violation of principles of natural justice, besides directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to catch the fish from Narasanna Tank to Toleru Gram Panchayat of Veeravasam Mandal of West Godavari District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.S.R.ANJANEYALU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR FISHERIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No. 6346 of 2009 Order: The Gram Panchayat, Toleru of Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District, conducted auction for grant of right to catch naturally grown fish on one day in a water resource. The petitioner emerged as the highest bidder for Rs.4,000/- in the auction held on 06.04.2008 and the Gram Panchayat accorded approval for grant of permission to the petitioner. Permission was also granted on 26.02.2009. However, permission was cancelled, through the proceedings dated 02.03.2009, on the ground that certain complaints have been received. Same is challenged by the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat. Even from a perusal of the impugned proceedings, it is evident that the petitioner emerged as highest bidder and was granted permission on depositing Rs.4,000/-. If there exists any valid basis for cancellation of the permission, notice ought to have been given to the petitioner. Such a notice was not given and the permission was cancelled straightaway. On this short ground, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Date: 30.03.2009 Nsr