( 1 ) THE Gram Panchayat, Pondugula, mylavaram Mandal, Krishna District, is the writ petitioner. The Writ Petition is filed for issuance of an order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring memo No. SI/mc/188-Spl, dated 27-3-1999 issued by 2nd respondent and consequential divisional proceedings No. AB/a1/296-M, dated 30-3-1999 issued by 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, without jurisdiction and unconstitutional and contrary to the rules and consequently direct the respondents to grant leasehold rights of mango trees, numbering 320 in the foreshore of Chavitivagu tank of Pondugula village Mylavaram Mandal, Krishna District to the petitioner-Gram Panchayat, as is being granted earlier in terms of A. P. P. W. D. Code Para 344, r/w. Rule 1-A and B under appendix thereunder and pass such other suitable orders.

( 2 ) THOUGH the pleadings of the parties are lengthy, the question involved in the Writ petition is short and simple. However, for the purpose of disposal of this Writ Petition, the facts in nut shell are as follows: it is stated that the petitioner-Gram panchayat had been enjoying the leasehold rights of the Mango trees in the foreshore of chavitivagu tank of Pondugula village, mylavaram Mandal for the last more than 17 years and after the trees are leased out to the gram Panchayat, the Gram Panchayat will put a public auction and at the time of conducting public auction, the matter will be referred to the Divisional Panchayat Officer, vijayawada to fix the upset price and after fixing the upset price the Extension Officer (Panchayats), Mylavaram will conduct the public auction and the same will be allotted to the highest bidders. The procedure to be followed in this regard also had been specified in detail. It is also stated that the gram Panchayat had passed resolution for the year 1996-97 for allotment of leasehold rights of the said trees requesting the 3rd respondent through 4th respondent, but no reply was received. But however, the Gram panchayat came to know that the leasehold rights were given to some third parties by proceedings dated 17-12-1997 by 3rd respondent for a period of one year. It is also stated that though the lease in favour of the gram Panchayat had not expired which was granted earlier, by proceedings dated 29-4-1997, the Gram Panchayat was not informed about the granting of leasehold rights to the third parties contrary to the rules. W. P. No. 9109/97, dated 1-5-1997 and the orders made therein also had been referred to and it is stated that the orders passed by this Honourable Court is to consider the representation dated 21-4-1997 for leasing out the mango garden. Basing on the said orders passed by this Court, the plea of third parties had been rejected and when a legal notice was sent by the third parties, who are the petitioners in w. P. No. 9107/97, a detailed reply was given by the 3rd respondent vide letter dated 1-7-1997 stating that the third parties are not entitled in view of the provisions made under Para 344 of A. P. P. W. D. Code and as per the instructions of the Chief Engineer, minor Irrigation, A. P. , Hyderabad, vide his letter dated 18-7-1986. Subsequent thereto, another representation was made by the third parties on 4-12-1997 to the respondents herein and by quoting W. P. No. 9107/97, the leasehold rights were granted to them for a period of one year contrary to the Rules. It is also stated that the Gram Panchayat had already requested the respondents, vide resolution No. 24, dated 29-8-1997, but without granting leasehold rights to the gram Panchayat, the same had been allotted to the third parties without any notice to the gram Panchayat. It is also stated that the writ petitioner-Gram Panchayat had requested the respondents vide letter no. 1/98, dated 1-1-1998 for grant of leasehold rights and no action had been taken and the Gram Panchayat again passed resolution No. 33, dated 21-7-1998 requesting the respondents herein fo