The petitioner, namely Nellore Zilla Parishad, represented by its Chairman, has filed this writ petition questioning the orders dated 14.10.2010, issued by respondent No.1, namely the Government of Andhra Pradesh, entertaining the revision, filed by respondent No.6, and pending thereof, staying the auction of Reach No. 50, Kotitheerdham, Chejarla Mandal of SPSR Nellore District, in pursuance of the auction notification No. 864/S/10-4, dated 05.10.2010 of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Nellore, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently to set aside the same, and permit respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to proceed with the auction in terms of the auction notification dated 05.10.2010. The petitioner states that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. Ms. No. 24, Industries and Commerce (M.1) Department, dated 12.02.2007, rationalizing the procedure for conducting sand auctions. As per Clause 12 thereof, auctions would be conducted every year, for a period of one year from 1st January to 31st December, and further as per Clause 22, the auction proceeds would be distributed amongst the Zilla Parishad/Mandal Praja Parishads/Gram Panchayats, in the ratio of 25:50:25 respectively, on quarterly basis, as envisaged in G.O. Ms. No. 225, Pasnchayat Raj and Rural Development, dated 02.08.2001. Subsequently, the Government issued Circular Memo No. 1536/R9/2008, dated 06.10.2008, changing the period of auction every year from 1st April to 31st March of succeeding year. As election code came into force, the petitioner states that auction notification, for auctioning the leasehold rights to quarry sand, could not be issued for the lease year 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2010 prior to 01.04.2009, and the auction notification was issued on 18.04.2009. In pursuance of the said auction notification, auction was conducted on 18.05.2009 in respect of the reach in question, namely Reach No. 50 in Penna River of Kotitheerdham, Chejerla Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, in which respondent No.6 was the highest bidder. Accordingly, respondent No.3, namely the Joint Collector-cum-District Level Sand Committee, issued proceedings dated 18.05.2009, confirming the auction in favour of respondent No. 6, who as per the terms and conditions of the auction notification, deposited 25% of the bid amount. While so, a writ petition in W.P. No. 10073 of 2009 was filed before this Court in public interest alleging that the reaches have been auctioned without the reaches having been identified by the River Conservator and without obtaining clearance from the Ground Water Department. A Division Bench of this Court stayed the auction proceedings. Because of the said stay orders, no further steps could be taken pursuant to the auctions conducted, including in respect of the reach in question, for which respondent No.6 is the highest bidder. The petitioner got impleaded as party-respondent in the said writ petition. Ultimately, by order dated 22.01.2010, the writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court holding that there appears to be no illegality to grant lease in accordance with law pursuant to the auction notification dated 18.04.2009 in respect of those reaches for which clearance was issued by the Director, Ground Water Department and which clearance is available with the District Level Sand Committee, and in respect of those reaches, where no Ground Water Clearance reports are available, no grant of leases can be made, even if the bids pursuant to auction notification are processed. After disposal of the above writ petition, respondent No.5, namely the Assistant Director, Mines and Geology, issued notice dated 22.11.2009 calling upon respondent No.6 to pay the balance 75% of the amount and submit the necessary documents for execution of lease deed, but respondent No.6 did not do so. Therefore, respondent No.5, as a last chance, issued another letter dated 23.01.2010 calling upon respondent No.6, to submit the required documents for executi