IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL NO : 204 of 2001 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 06/02/2001 in WP NO : 1444 OF 2001 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Chenugonipalli Fishermen Cooperative Society Ltd., Regd.No.H.136, Rep.by its President Viz. Joorala Naganna S/o.Eedanna, Age 56 yrs, Chenugonipalli Gadwal Mandal, Mahabubnagar Dist ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The District Collector Mahabubnagar Dist., Mahabubnagar 2 The Divisional Panchayath Officer Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar Dist 3 The Divisional Panchayath Officer Gadwal, Mahabubnagar Dist 4 The Commissioner and Director of Fisheries Govt. of A.P., Hyderabad 5 The Regional Deputy Director of Fisheries/ Ex-Officio Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Fish) Zone-VI, Hyderabad 6 The Assistant Director of Fisheries and Ex-Officio Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar Dist 7 The Fisheries Development Officer Kothakota Jurisdiction, Kothakota Mahabubnagar Dist 8 The Sarpanch / Person In charge Chenugonipally Grampanchayath Hamlet of Gadwal Village Mahabubnagar Dist 9. Chennakesava Fisherman Cooperative Society Rep.by its President Telugukukkala Chandramulu S/o.Doulanna, age 41 yrs, R/o.Gadwal Village, Mahabubnagar Dist .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.V.AJAYAKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.RANGANADH RAO The Court made the following : ORAL JUDGMENT: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Aggrieved by the order, dated 06.02.2001 made in WP No.1444 of 2001 by a learned Single Judge of this court, dismissing the writ petition, the writ petitioner preferred this Writ Appeal. The proceedings dated 9.1.2001 issued by the second respondent were assailed in the writ petition, claiming that the appellant society came into existence in the year 1984 and after its registration, the area of operation of the Society is Chenugonipalli village, consisting of Peddacheruvu, Jokakunta, Thumucheruvu and Mekalavani cheruvu, in respect of which fishing rights were exercised by the 9th respondent society prior to the appellant society coming into existence. Pursuant to the existence of the appellant society, the water sources from Gadwal village were brought within the area of operation of the Appellant Society, by an order of the 6th respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, the 9th respondent herein filed a revision before the 7th respondent, who, after hearing the parties, set aside the order issued by the 6th respondent. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed WP No. 2791 of 1985 which was disposed of directing the 7th respondent herein to issue notices to all the parties and rehear the matter. The 7th respondent after hearing the matter set aside the order dated 3.9.1985 passed by the 6th respondent in favour of the appellant Society. This order was assailed by the appellant society in WP No.1989 of 1986 and WP No. 14639 of 1987 was filed by the 9th respondent society against the order passed by the 6th respondent dated 9.9.1987. Both these writ petitions were disposed of by order dated 16.12.1988, holding that the respondent society is entitled for fishing rights, but however, the members of the appellant society were directed to make their applications afresh to the Chennakesava Fishermen Cooperative Society and the said society was directed to admit such applicants therein to operate their fishing along with the other members of Chennakesava Fisherman Cooperative Society. After hearing both the counsel, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition observing that the appellant had indulged in speculative litigation, inasmuch the order dated 16.12.1988 made in WP No. 1989 of 1986 and the WP No. 14639 of 1987, has become final and further observed that the final verdict of the court has to be respected, which is essence of rule of law. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Appeal is filed by the writ petitioner inter alia contending that inasmuch as the appellant is the existing holder of leasehold rights in respect of Peddacheruvu situated in Gadwal, Mahabubnagar, the learned Single Judge ought not to have dismissed the writ petition. Admittedly, the order in Writ Petition Nos. 1989 of 1986 and the WP No. 14639 of 1987 dated 16.12.1988 filed by the appellant society and the 9th respondent has attained finality. In view of the said fact, we are of the opinion that the writ appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. However, learned counsel for the appellant submits that Chenugonipalli village has become a separate Gram Panchayath under Gadwal Municipality and, as such, liberty may be granted to the appellant Society to make fresh representation to the second respondent for grant of fishing rights. Having regard to these facts, in the event, such a representation is made, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari _______________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan July 14, 2008 MAS. ........REGISTRAR To 1. 2.2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WA {LOBIS}