THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.11769 of 2011 ORDER : The petitioners claim to be the elected members of Watershed Committee of Gingurthy Gram Panchayat for a term of ﬁve years from 20-06-2008 to 19-06-2013. They have ﬁled this Writ Petition, aggrieved by a later resolution dated 05-03- 2011 replacing their committee by constituting new committee. Admittedly constitution of watershed committees is not governed by any statutory provision. The question whether a writ petition is maintainable and the Mandamus could be issued was examined by this Court in C.D.Reddy v. District Collector-cum-Chairman, Watershed Dev. Committee [1] and it was held therein as follows : “Be that as it may, there are no rules framed whatsoever either by the State Government or by the Central Government prescribing the mode and method of constituting of the Committee. The mode and method of constituting and selecting the Committees at various levels is provided by a scheme. The scheme is printed in the form of a bulletin to the information of the general public. The scheme framed is not with reference to any statute as such. It is thus clear that there is neither any Statute nor any Rules framed under any Statute regulating the mode and method of constitution of the Committee. The duties and responsibilities of the members of the Committee is also not speciﬁed by any statute. The instructions contained in the booklet characterised by the petitioners as the “Rules” are in the nature of broad and general guidelines as to how the Committees at village levels are required to be constituted. The guidelines do not create any corresponding rights in any of the villagers or beneﬁciaries of the scheme nor those guidelines create any obligation and impose any duties upon the respondents. It is one of those developmental schemes intended for the better management and utilisation of sub-soil water resources. Even according to the guidelines, the Watershed Committee after its constitution is required to be registered as a Society under the Societies Registration Act. The body thus constituted either at the village level or the District level is not a statutory body nor constituted under any Statute. The question that arises for consideration is as to whether a Writ of Mandamus would lie in case of violation of any guidelines? In the instant case, the guidelines upon which reliance is placed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners are not even in the nature of administrative instructions. They are various items forming part of the scheme as to how the committees are required to be constituted for the purpose of implementation of the scheme. The members of the Committee cannot be said to be holding any public oﬃce as such. Even if it is to be assumed that the constitution of Watershed Committee for the village in question is contrary to the guidelines, no Writ of Mandamus would lie to set aside the constitution of the Committee. In my considered opinion, the writ petition is totally misconceived.” In the light of the aforesaid Judgment with which I am in agreement, this Writ Petition is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed. The petitioners are however at liberty to seek any other remedy if available to them under law. No costs. As a consequence of the dismissal of the Writ Petition, the interim order dated 26-04-2011 in W.P.M.P.No.14375 of 2011 stands annulled and W.P.M.P.Nos.14375, 2012 and 37980 of 2011 and W.V.M.P. No.1891 of 2011 are dismissed as unnecessary. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 29th November, 2011. skmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.11769 of 2011 Date : 29-11-2011 Between : B.Divakar & another .. Petitioners and The Govt. of India, rep. by the Secretary (A & C), Department of Agriculture & Co.operation, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi & 5 Others .. Respondents [1] 1998 (4) ALD 705