ORDER 1. Petitioner in the instant writ petition seeks issue of writ of certiorari for quashing the order (Annexure P-l) passed by the Collector District Bhopal. Petitioner is a Co-operative Society involved in fishing. Petitioner Society claims lease of "Chuna Bhatti" a water reservoir. Petitioner Society was granted a 'Patta' by respondent No.3 for a period of five years. It was extended for ten years. This period has to expire on 30th June, 2002. Janpad Panchayat Fanda had passed a resolution in favour of the petitioner Society for exercise of fishing right for a period of seven years. As the period was beyond three years, the matter was placed before the Collector, District Bhopal for sanction. The resolution of Janpad Panchayat had not attained finality. Respondent No.5 and 6 Gas Peedit Mathsya Uddyog Co-operative Society, Bhopal and Sona Matsya Udyog Co-operative Society, Bhopal filed an appeal before respondent No.3 under section 91 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. Petitioner submits that appeals were not maintainable. The Collector as per order Annex. P-1 passed on March 26th, 2002 has come to the conclusion that water reservoir is within the limits of Bhopal Corporation. Thus the grant of lease of water reservoir is within the jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation and directed Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bhopal to complete the proceedings for grant of lease within a period of one month. The resolution passed by the Janpad Panchayat has been quashed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no interference could be made by the Collector in the resolution passed by the Janpad Panchayat as appeal against resolution cannot be filed and is not maintainable. Learned counsel further submits that since the lease was granted to the petitioner at an earlier point of time the same is being renewed now. Thus the instructions dated 9.5.1997 are not applicable. The decision of the Collector is thus bad in law. 3. A perusal of the order passed by the Collector indicates that area in question falls within limits of the Municipal Corporation Bhopal. This fact has also not been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that area in question falls within the Municipal Corporation Bhopal. The decision of the Collector is thus bad in law. 3. A perusal of the order passed by the Collector indicates that area in question falls within limits of the Municipal Corporation Bhopal. This fact has also not been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that area in question falls within the Municipal Corporation Bhopal. It has been found to be an urban area and Chuna Bhatti reservoir has been found to be in ownership of Capital Project Administration and there is an entry to that effect made in the Fisheries Department Scheme of 1997. 4. The Collector has further relied upon memo dated May 9, 1997 (Annex. P-7) Perusal of the same makes it clear that the Gram Panchayat has the power to give upto 10 hectare of the area, Janpad Panchayat has jurisdiction above 10 hec. to 100 hec. and District Panchay1lt 100 hec. to 2000 hec. It was also noticed that owing to formation of the local bodies, Gram Panchayat, Janpad Panchayats are not entitled to grant the lease falling within the limits of such local bodies. Since the area in question falls within the jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation Bhopal, thus, it cannot be said that Janpad Panchayat Fanda has any right to give the lease of water reservoir in question. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that an appeal against resolution could not be entertained by the Collector. This question is of no consequence as the Collector is the sanctioning authority as per case setup by the petitioner and Collector has mentioned that he has not yet sanctioned the resolution passed by the Janpad Panchayat. Thus• the Collector being the sanctioning authority, it cannot be said that Collector lacks jurisdiction to decide the dispute in question. When Collector has jurisdiction to sanction the resolution, he can definitely go into the propriety, correctness, validity and legality of the resolution passed by the Janpad Panchayat. The order does not suffer from any infirmity. Even otherwise no writ can be issued to revive a resolution of Janpad Panchayat which has been rightly found by the sanctioning authority to be without competence, Janpad Panchayat was not empowered to grant renewal. 6. Resultantly, the writ petition is without merit and is dismissed in limine.