Judgment 1. This Letters Patent Appeal challenges the order of 29 October 2002 on C.W.J.C. No. 6230 of 2002 : Ram Brat Singh Yadav V/s. Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board and Ors. 2. The submissions on behalf of the petitioner appellant clearly are that the learned Judge ought to have given a mandamus for holding Mangla Pasu Mela notwithstanding the fact that there was rival, respondent no. 6. The learned Judge was of the opinion that between the petitioner and respondent no.6 there is a rivalry. The learned Judge said that both have constitutional right to hold Mela upon licence being granted and one cannot debar the other. On the aspect whether two rivals should be separated, particularly days or distance, the learned Judge was of the opinion that this is a matter which needs to be decided by the authority concerned or in any failure perhaps the learned Judge was referring to a declaration by a suit. 3. The petitioner relies on an order of the High Court which was passed on 10 July, 1982 (Annexure 2). The contention is that by this order it has already been said that the Mela had been conferred upon the petitioner. The Court is making no comment on any right which may have accrued to the petitioner on this order, in case it had been, but the content of the order has now become out of date. 4. There is another academic question which arises on who exactly will control the Mela because after the order on which the petitioner relies the Constitution of India was amended by the 73rd and 74th amendment and certain schemes and economic development spheres were given to Panchayats, in reference to Article 243G, read with the Eleventh Schedule, entry 22, the subject "Market and Fairs" has gone to the Panchayats. Of course, this will depend upon the legislature of the State by law endowing the Panchayats with such power which has been delayed. 5. The Court is not inclined to interfere on this appeal. 6. Dismissed.