IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI DEVINDER GUPTA, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 4096 of 2005 Between: D. Vijay Kumar S/o D. Yadagiri Rao, R/o Raghurama Complex, Ramgiri, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The District Collector, Nalgonda. 2. The Arya Prathinidhi Sabha, Hyderabad, rep. by its President Dr. T.V. Narayana, R/o H.No. 58/3RT, Potti Sreeramulu Nagar, Vijaynagar Colony, Hyderabad. 3. Nuthi Vishwamitra, S/o Venkat Narayan, Arya Samaj, Nalgonda, R/o H.No. 6-7-42, Shivajinagar, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 4. Jella Biksham, s/o Raghunatham, R/o Charlapally Village, Mandal & District, Nalgonda. 5. Nannuru Vara Prasad, S/o Rangaiah, R/o H.No. 6-1-7, Vidyanagar Colony, Nalgonda Town, Nalgonda District. 6. Katkuri Srinivas Reddy, s/o Malla Reddy, R/o Dasai Gudem Village, Mandal Suryapet, Nalgonda District. 7. Beeravelli Gopal Reddy, S/o Pulla Reddy, R/o Ramgiri, Nalgonda Town, District Nalgonda. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 to enquire into the alleged agreement of sale between R2 to R7 and to appoint a Commissioner or to constitute a body to safeguard the interests of the Arya Samaj, Nalgonda (Vedic Ashram) for which it was established and also to declare the agreement of sale between respondents 2 to 7 as illegal, null and void in the interest of general public of Nalgonda Town. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. D.SHASHIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 to 7: None appeared. The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per Honourable Sri Devinder Gupta, the Chief Justice) Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ petition since the writ petition against the action of the private individual is not maintainable and the petitioner has to seek his remedy elsewhere in accordance with law. With leave and liberty granted, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ DEVINDER GUPTA, C.J. 17.3.2005. ___________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. VR. To 1. The District Collector, Nalgonda. 2. Two CCs to Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 3) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{AVLR}