IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 9900 of 2009 Between: D.V.Subba Rao S/o. Venkateswara Rao Sri Purugula Veeranjaneya Swamy Temple Raja Rajeshware Pet Vijayawada,Krishna District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector Krishna District,Machilipatnam 2 The Tahsildar Vijayawada Urban (M) Krishna District 3 The Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada Vijayawada,Krishna District .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue an appropriate writ,order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not encroach the land of Temple in Demarcation No.97 of Viajayawada Urban (M) Krishna District which is inculding a bore well without following due process of acquisition by declaring their action is being illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300-A of the constitution of India and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.RAMANA ALLU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.NO.9900 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER Neither the State nor an instrumentality of the State is impleaded as a respondent in this writ petition filed by an individual claiming to be a trustee of Sri Purugula Veeranjaneya Swamy temple, Raja Rajesware pet, Vijayawada, Krishna District wherein a direction is sought to the respondents not to encroach the land of the temple. In para.4 of the writ petition a vague assertion is made that the respondents are encroaching the land of the temple without any notice and following the procedure for acquisition and that earlier too the Railway Department had laid a railway track across the temple land whereby the temple lost property of an extent of Ac.1.50 cents. The writ petition is bereft of any particulars as to the date of the alleged action and which official had committed the overt act of what is stated to be an encroachment of temple lands. In the circumstances as neither the allegations are specific nor the array of the respondents discloses any State action, the petitioner must be relegated to pursue appropriate remedies in private law and not under Article.226 of the Constitution of India. Granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue the appropriate private law remedy, the writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. _________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 2nd JUNE 2009 TSNR