THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 4720 of 2009 O r d e r: The petitioner is questioning the action of respondent No.4, namely M/s. Idea Cellular Limited, in canceling the “My Idea Franchisee” given to the petitioner, by seeking directions to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to take necessary action against respondent No.4. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are also M/s. Idea Cellular Limited, but represented by its Chairman and Managing Director, who are placed in the Corporate Office. M/s. Idea Cellular Limited, is a limited company, and it not being a statutory authority nor an instrumentality of State falling within the definition of “State” as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution of India, no writ petition can be maintained against it. However, the petitioner conveniently to maintain the present writ petition has made respondent No.1, namely the Government of India as a party-respondent to the writ petition, which has nothing to do with the appointment of the petitioner as “My Idea Franchisee” by respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and also cancellation of such appointment by them. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. If the petitioner feels that respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in violation of the agreements have cancelled its appointment as “My Idea Franchisee”, the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the Court having competent jurisdiction seeking appropriate reliefs. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 17th March, 2009. KSR