IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.17184 and 18665 of 2008 W.P.No.17184 of 2008 Between: Pulipadu Fishermen Cooperative Society Limited (Regn.No. V-36), Pulipadu, Mundlamuru Mandal, Prakasam District rep. by its President. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector (Panchayats) Prakasam District, Ongole. 2 The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Kandukur, Prakasam District. 3 Fisheries Development Officer, Government Fisheries Station, Darsi, Prakasam District. 4 The Gram Panchayat, Vullagallu, Mundlamuru Mandal, Prakasam 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 more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent Gram Panchayat in notifying the fishery rights of Vullagallu tank by way of public auction on 28.08.2008 as per R.O.C.No.1/08 dated 19.08.2008 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.343 Panchayat Raj dated 10.4.1978 and the failure of the Gram Panchayat to communicate the upset price to the petitioner society is vitiated and consequently direct the 4th respondent Gram Panchayat to grant fishery rights to the petitioner society in respect of Vullagallu tank as per G.O.Ms.No.343 Gram Panchayat dated 10.4.1978 and pass such other appropriate orders as are deemed fit and proper in the interests of justice. W.P.No. 17184 of 2008 Between: Pulipadu Fishermen Cooperative Society Limited (Regn. No. V-36) Pulipadu, Mundlamuru Mandal, Prakasam District, Rep. by its President. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, (Panchayats) Prakasam District, Ongole. 2 The Divisional Panchayat Officer Kandukur, Prakasam District. 3 Fisheries Development Officer, Government Fisheries Station, Darsi, Prakasam District. 4 The Gram Panchayat,. Vullagallu, Mundlamuru Mandal, Prakasam 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 to issue an appropriate writ order order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the 4th Respondent Gram Panchayat to grant lease of the fishery rights to the petitioner society in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 343 Panchayat Raj Dt. 10-4- 1978 after declaring its inaction to communicate the up set price fixed by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner society as being illegal, and arbitrary and pass such other appropriate orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.ADINARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.17184 of 18665 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: In these writ petitions, failure on the part of the respondents to comply with the requirement of Rule 3 of the Rules notified in G.O.Ms.No.343 dated 10-04-1978 is in question. The contention mainly revolves around the requirement of issuing a notice to the petitioner-Society atleast 15 days before the date of the auction and the stipulation of sending the notice by registered post acknowledgement due. In the case on hand, admittedly, neither of these requirements had been complied with. While the notice was issued on 06-09-2008, the auction notification was issued on 19-08-2008, which is less than the stipulated 15 days. Further, the notice was allegedly sent to the petitioner-Society by certificate of posting, receipt of which is denied by them. In any event, the rules require notice to be sent by registered post acknowledgement due and not by certificate of posting. On the failure on the part of the respondents in adhering to these statutory rules being pointed out, Sri I.Koti Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat and Sri M.Prabhakar Rao, learned standing counsel for the Gram Panchayat, would fairly state that, with a view to avoid further delay, it would suffice if this Court were to permit the fourth respondent-Gram Panchayat to grant lease of fishing rights to the petitioner-Society for a period of three years on payment of the upset price of Rs.8,25,000/-. Smt G.Jhansi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, would point out that this amount of Rs.8,25,000/- represents the lease amount payable for the three year period and that the first year lease amount would only be 1/3rd thereof i.e. Rs.2,75,000/-. Learned counsel would further submit that an agreement is required to be entered into by the District Collector with the petitioner-Society and that the petitioner-Society is ready and willing to pay this sum of Rs.2,75,000/- within a period of two weeks from today subject to the condition that an agreement is entered into by the District Collector with the petitioner-Society prior thereto. Sri I.Koti Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, would contend that the procedure prescribed is that the lessee shall pay this lease amount in the treasury and on, production of the challan, an agreement will be entered into with them. Both the writ petitions are disposed of directing that, on the petitioners depositing the sum of Rs.2,75,000/- in the treasury within a period of two weeks from today, the District Collector shall enter into an agreement with them within one week thereafter and, within one week from the date of the agreement, the Gram Panchayat shall put the petitioner-Society in possession of the tank in question and ensure that their fishing rights are not interfered with. No order as to costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Dt:17.12.2008 Note:CC by Monday bo usd