IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20517 of 2005 Between: Oosa Bhaskar, S/o. Peda Mala Kondaiah, R/o. Katigiri Village & Mandal, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Nellore. 2 The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Kavali. 3 The Mandal Development Officer, Kaligiri Mandal, Nellore District. 4 The kaligiri Gram Panchayat, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, Kaligiri, Nellore District. 5 Sarpanch, Kaligiri Gram Panchayat, Kaligiri, Nellore District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SMT. CH.VEDAVANI The Court made the following : ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.4 and 5 in contemplating to lease out the shopping complex consisting of 12 rooms belonging to Kaligiri Gram Panchayat situated at the northern side of Masjid road in Kaligiri Village and Mandal, Nellore District as illegal. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to conduct public auction. Heard Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Ch.Vedavani, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.4 and 5. At the hearing, the learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 invited my attention to counter-affidavit, dated 15.11.2007 filed by Sri D.Narayana, Panchayat secretary of Kaligiri Gram Panchayat, Nellore District, wherein it is stated as under: “I submit by virtue of the status quo order none of the occupants of the said shops are depositing the rents whereby huge losses are occurred to the Gram Panchayat. Apart from that the present petitioner does not have any locus to question the inaction of the Sarpanch nor he impleaded any of the allottee as a party to the present proceedings as ordered by this Honourable Court. Admittedly the period for the allotment is also lapsed by 13.09.2006. Thus all the allottees who were illegally put in possession by the then Sarpanch has to vacate the premises. I submit that as per G.O.Ms.No.496 dated 11.06.1966 the period of lease is only one year. Apparently the said lease period is expired by 13.09.2006 as per the resolution dated 10.09.2005. Thus the present body is bound to conduct an auction of the said market yards for further one year. Thus, the petitioner herein prays this Honourable Court may please to vacate the interim order dated 06.10.2005 passed in WPMP.No.26169 of 2005 in W.P.No.20517 of 2005 so as to enable the petitioner to conduct the fresh auction by following the due procedure contemplated in the Act.” Having regard to the above reproduced averments wherein respondent No.4 agreed to conduct the auction of the leasehold rights of the shopping complex, the grievance of the petitioner raised in this writ petition stands redressed. The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. Respondent No.4 is directed to conduct auction of the leasehold rights of the shopping complex in question by following the procedure prescribed by the rules in force within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, interim order, dated 06.10.2005 is vacated and WPMP.No.26169 of 2005 is dismissed. WVMP.No.3132 of 2007 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 27th June, 2008. Note: issue c.c. in one week. B/o kvni