THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKUR AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1105 OF 2011 DATED:05-12-2011 Between: Md. Dastagiri and others. … Appellants And The District Panchayat Officer, Warangal and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKUR AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1105 OF 2011 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Shri Madan B. Lokur) 1. The appellants are aggrieved by an order dated 22.11.2011 passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 30786 of 2011. 2. According to the appellants, they are in possession of shops allotted to them by an oral agreement with the Torrur Gram Panchayat, Warangal District. 3. From the judgment under appeal, it appears that the shops were initially leased out on a monthly rent of Rs.750/- and thereafter when the lease period came to an end, the appellants continued in the premises on month to month basis. 4. Now, the Gram Panchayat has decided to auction the allotment of the shops, perhaps to raise revenue. 5. According to the appellants, since they have been in possession of the shops for a long time, the respondents should not be allowed to auction the shops. 6. It is quite clear that the lease of the appellants has come to an end and they are continuing on a month to month basis. Under the circumstances, if the respondents are desirous of auctioning the leasehold rights, they are entitled to do so and the appellants have no right to continue in the premises indefinitely. 7. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the respondents did not commit any error in issuing the tender notification for auctioning the leasehold rights of the shops presently occupied by the appellants. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants in support of his appeal, submits that there was an oral agreement to permit the appellants to continue in possession of the shops allotted to them. 9. There is nothing on the record to suggest when the oral agreement was entered into and with whom. On the contrary, the learned Single Judge held that the shops were leased out and it is only after the lease had come to an end that the respondents are auctioning the leasehold rights. 10. There is no merit in the appeal ﬁled by the appellants and we do not ﬁnd any error committed by the learned Single Judge in upholding the auction of the leasehold rights of the shops in question. 11. The appeal is dismissed and the miscellaneous application is also dismissed. MADAN B. LOKUR, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J 05-12-2011 pnb