JUDGMENT Sadhana S. Jadhav, Manish Pitale, J. - By this Writ Petition the Dhado Khazana Tenants Association has approached this Court in the face of a Show Cause Notice dtd. 22/12/2021 issued by respondent No. 1-Mamlatdar of Tiswadi Taluka, as to why the Managing Committee of the petitioner Association ought not to be dissolved. 2. The brief facts leading up to filing of the present petition are that auction of fishing rights of the sluice gate of Dhado Khazana were fixed on 21/12/2021, by an order of the Mamlatdar. 3. It appears that on 20/12/2021, the Mamlatdar passed an order directing that the auction fixed for 21/12/2021 be adjourned. It is the case of the Chairman of the petitioner Association that the said order was received by him at 10.35 a.m. on 21/12/2021, when the auction proceedings were already completed. 4. It is significant to note that an earlier Writ Petition bearing Writ Petition No. 2680 of 2021 (F) was filed by one Dipak Shripad Naik concerning the very same auction, expressing an apprehension that there was likelihood of auction being cancelled. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by an order dtd. 21/12/2021, on the basis of statement made that the auction was indeed conducted on 21/12/2021 itself and that therefore, the prayers made in the Writ petition were rendered infructuous. It was recorded that the auction was fixed at 9.30 am and that the proceedings were indeed completed where the petitioner in the said Writ Petition had participated in the said auction. 5. As noted above, the Mamlatdar issued the Show Cause Notice on 22/12/2021 seeking an explanation from the petitioner Association as to why the Managing Committee should not be dissolved for the reason that despite the order dtd. 20/12/2021, asking the Association to adjourn the auction proceedings, the auction was conducted and the proceedings were completed. 6. On 29/12/2021, the learned Judge of this Court sitting in the vacation Court issued notice and granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause 'c', thereby staying the operation of the impugned orders dtd. 20/12/2021 and 22/12/2021. 7. This Writ Petition was called out for hearing yesterday, when it transpired that other than the Chairman of the Petitioner Association all the office bearers had a grievance that the auction conducted on 21/12/2021 was without their participation and that they never signed on the proceedings book. 20/12/2021 and 22/12/2021. 7. This Writ Petition was called out for hearing yesterday, when it transpired that other than the Chairman of the Petitioner Association all the office bearers had a grievance that the auction conducted on 21/12/2021 was without their participation and that they never signed on the proceedings book. In this situation, this Court requested the learned Counsel for the petitioner to produce a photocopy of the proceedings of the auction dtd. 21/12/2021. 8. Today when the petition was called out, Mr. S.S. Kantak, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner Association presented across the bar photocopy of the proceedings of the auction dtd. 21/12/2021, which was taken on record and marked 'X' for the purpose of identification. A bare perusal of the same shows that it is signed only by the Chairman of the petitioner Tenants Association and signature of all other office bearers are not appended, although it is recorded that they were present at the auction proceedings. It is also recorded in the said proceedings that the representative of the Mamlatdar was absent and the Committee decided to wait for 10 minutes and thereafter, the auction proceedings was conducted. Nonetheless, there is nothing in the said proceedings to indicate that the Mamlatdar or his representatives were present when the auction proceedings were undertaken. 9. In this backdrop, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that although he had certain submissions to make with regard to the power of the Mamlatdar in the context of holding such auction in the backdrop of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act and Rules framed thereunder, since the Mamlatdar has at present issued a Show Cause Notice, the petitioner would file a detailed reply to the said notice so as to explain as to why the drastic action of dissolution of the Managing Committee should not be taken. It is indicated that a preliminary reply is already filed and that the petitioner Association through the Chairman intends to file a detailed reply on the Show Cause Notice. 10. Mr. G. Agni, learned Advocate appearing for the other office bearers of the Association submits that they would file a separate reply before the Mamlatdar in the aforesaid proceedings. 11. In view of the above, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition by giving directions to the Mamlatdar. 12. 10. Mr. G. Agni, learned Advocate appearing for the other office bearers of the Association submits that they would file a separate reply before the Mamlatdar in the aforesaid proceedings. 11. In view of the above, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition by giving directions to the Mamlatdar. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by granting an opportunity to the petitioner Association through its Chairman as also the other office bearers of the Association to file their detailed replies in response to the Show Cause Notice dtd. 22/12/2021, within a period of one week from today. The Mamlatdar shall take into consideration the aforesaid replies and pass an appropriate order in pursuance to the Show Cause Notice dtd. 22/12/2021, strictly in accordance with law. 13. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.