THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29515 of 2010 Date: 26.11.2010 Between: Sri Vidyodaya Educational Society ..... PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Chittoor District and others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri N. Karuna Sagar Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : A.G.P. for Revenue The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29515 of 2010 Order: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in receiving and putting seal on resolution dated 28.1.2010 of the purported General Body of Sri Vidyodaya Educational Society, sent by respondent No.3 as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri M.Karuna Sagar, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The facts narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition reveal that there are serious disputes between the petitioner on the one side and respondent No.3 on the other, regarding management of the petitioner-society, and O.S. No. 13 of 2003 filed by respondent No.3 is pending on the file of V Additional District Judge Tirupathi. The immediate cause on which the present writ petition is founded is that respondent No.3, without there being any authority has communicated the purported resolution of the General Body of the petitioner-society to respondent No.2, who instead of ignoring of the same in view of the pendency of the Civil dispute, has received the same by putting seal and placed it on file. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to point out that the act of respondent No.2 in receiving and putting his seal on the resolution sent by respondent No.3 constitutes violation of any of the statutory provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 2001. Learned counsel, however, pleaded that the action of respondent No.2 constitutes violation of principles of natural justice. On a careful consideration of this submission, I find no force therein, as the action of respondent No.2 in merely receiving the resolution communicated by respondent No.3 by itself would not create any right in respondent No.3 nor the same would affect the interests of the petitioner in asserting its right of management. Notwithstanding the said act of respondent No.2, the petitioner and respondent No.3 are entitled to assert their rights in the pending Suit and in any other proper forum, which they are entitled to approach in accordance with law. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, W.P.M.P. No.37607 of 2010 is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY,J DATE: 26th November, 2010 pnb