IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 1030 of 2009 Between: 1 Madurai Kamaraj University Study Centre, National Degree College, Opp: Railway Station, Secunderabad - 500025, rep. by its Programme Director Mothi Khan. 2 Mrs.Mothi Khan W/o.Khadar Khan R/o.Flat 301, Wilmott Apts. West Maredpally, Secunderabad - 500 026. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND Madurai Kamaraj University, Directorate of Distance Education, Palkalai Nagar, Madurai - 625 021, Rep. by its Director Dr.S.Vadivelu. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction one more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in issuing letter No.M.K.U./D.D.E/OS/2009/115 dated 07.01.2009 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in breach of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and pass such further or other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.NIRANJAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the letter dated 07.01.2009 issued by the Director of Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai, proposing to close down the Study Centre of Directorate of Distance Education-Madurai Kamaraj University, situated at Secunderabad, with immediate effect, which according to the petitioner, is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner is a study center accredited by Madurai Kamaraj University. It entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the respondent-University for conducting the courses offered by it at the study center. It has been running the study center since 1999. While so, it is the case of the petitioner that the respondent issued letter dated 07.01.2009 unilaterally closing the study center run by the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. This Court, on 05.02.2009, while ordering notice before admission, also permitted the learned counsel for the petitioner to take out personal notice to the respondent by Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due. Today, when the matter is taken up for admission, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the order dated 05.02.2009, he sent notice to the respondent by Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due, and to that effect, he filed a Memo dated 04.03.2009 along with postal receipt to evidence the same. The petitioner is seeking relief against the respondent- University, which is located in the State of Tamil Nadu. This Court has no territorial jurisdiction to issue writs against the authorities or instrumentalities of the State of Tamil Nadu, and since the respondent- University, is a statutory body created by the State of Tamil Nadu, no writ can be issued by this Court against it, and more so when the petitioner has not shown any cause of action having arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, the writ petition is not maintainable, and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 4th March, 2009 bcj