ORDER : The writ petition in W.P(MD)No.22441 of 2015 is filed seeking for a Mandamus directing the respondent to confirm the tender bid of the petitioner and grant the lease of fishery rights of Sathaiyar Reservoir in Madurai District in favour of the petitioner for a period of 5 years. The writ petition in W.P(MD)No.247 of 2016 is filed by the very same petitioner challenging the tender notice dated 29.12.2015 in respect of the very same Reservoir. 2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:- The respondent invited the tender for granting lease of fishery rights of Sathaiyar Reservoir and in pursuance of such invitation, the petitioner submitted his tender and participated in the tender auction on 02.11.2015. However, the respondent has not confirmed the tender submitted by the petitioner, even though he has quoted the highest bid amount. On the other hand, the respondent issued fresh tender notice on 29.12.2015. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that when the petitioner has quoted highest bid amount, the respondent ought to have confirmed the tender in his favour instead of giving fresh tender-cum-auction notice dated 29.12.2015. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, based on instructions, submitted that when the tender-cum- auction held on 02.11.2015, the petitioner was the only person participated in the process and submitted the tender and therefore, on that reason, the auction was cancelled and consequently, fresh auction notice was issued on 29.12.2015. Therefore, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner can very well participate in the fresh auction to be held on 27.01.2016. 5. It is seen that when the earlier auction was held on 02.11.2015, the petitioner was the only tenderer. Therefore, the respondent was justified in going for a fresh tender. When the petitioner is having opportunity to take part in the subsequent auction proceedings as well, I find no reason to interfere with the present tender notice dated 29.12.2015. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner can very well submit his tender form within stipulated time. 6. Considering the above stated facts and circumstances, the writ petition in W.P(MD) No.22441 of 2015 is dismissed in view of the fact that the petitioner was the only tenderer and therefore, he cannot seek for confirmation of his tender. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner can very well submit his tender form within stipulated time. 6. Considering the above stated facts and circumstances, the writ petition in W.P(MD) No.22441 of 2015 is dismissed in view of the fact that the petitioner was the only tenderer and therefore, he cannot seek for confirmation of his tender. Likewise in W.P(MD) No.247 of 2016 I find no ground to interfere with the impugned tender notice dated 29.12.2015, as the petitioner can very well take part in the fresh auction. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to take part in the fresh tender-cum-auction to be held on 27.01.2016. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.