Judgment :- These Writ Petitions have been filed praying for a Writ of Certiorari to call for and quash the order, dated, 23.12.2009, passed by the fourth respondent, granting the lease to the fifth respondent for cutting the trees, in Athiyur Village Panchayat. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the fourth respondent has passed the impugned order, dated 23.12.2009 in an arbitrary and malafide manner. He had also submitted that the auction had not been held by following the due procedures established by law. No auction notice had been published, before the auction had been held, on 04.12.2009.He had also submitted that auction held, on 04.12.2009, was conducted in the house belonging to Panchayat president, the fourth respondent herein. 3. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent had submitted that the auction notice had been published in the news paper "Dhina Boomi", dated 22.11.2009.The auction had been conducted, on 04.12.2009, in the office of the Village Panchayat, in the presence of the Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat) and the Deputy Block Development Officer (Audit).Eleven persons had participated in the auction .The highest bid was made by the fifth respondent, for a sum of Rs.45,16,500/-. The second highest bid was made by one Abdul Salim, for a sum of Rs.45,16,000/-.Since, the fifth respondent was the highest bidder, the lease for cutting the trees had been granted to him, by the order of the fourth respondent, dated, 23.12.2009. The lease had been confirmed in favour of the fifth respondent, on 04.12.2009, on his depositing the entire amount of Rs.45,16,500/- 3. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned, and on perusal of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners have not shown sufficient cause or reason to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by them, in the present Writ Petitions. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that, no notice had been published before the auction was conducted, on 04.12.2009, cannot be countenanced. It is seen from the records available, that the auction notification had been published, in "Dhina Boomi", on 22.02.2009.Further, the petitioners are not in a position to substantiate their claim, that the auction had been conducted in a arbitrary and in a malafide manner. It is seen from the records available, that the auction notification had been published, in "Dhina Boomi", on 22.02.2009.Further, the petitioners are not in a position to substantiate their claim, that the auction had been conducted in a arbitrary and in a malafide manner. Further, the auction is said to have been conducted in the presence of the Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat) and the Deputy Block Development Officer (Audit), in the office of Village Panchayat, on 04.12.2009.Since, the fifth respondent is said to have been the highest bidder, for Rs.45,16,500/-, the lease had been confirmed in his favoring such circumstances, the Writ Petitions are devoid of merits and hence, they stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.