THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24756 OF 2005 Date:28.11.2005 Between: Manjula S. Sampathy … Petitioners AND The Government of A.P. and another … Respondent ORDER: The petitioner feels aggrieved by the alleged inaction on the part of the first respondent in considering her representation, dated 20.04.2005. The petitioner states that an institution, by name, Siva Sivani Institute of Management was established by an Educational Society, of which she was a member. It is stated that O.P.No.479 of 1997 on the file of the District Judge, Ranga Reddy District was filed, when disputes arose among the members of the society and pursuant to the decree passed therein, the said institute was transferred in favour of another agency. In her representation, dated 20.04.2005, the petitioner stated that the institute was initially established in an area of Ac.1.24 guntas in Sy.No.142 of Kompally village and later on it was shifted to the land in Sy.Nos.124 and 125 of that village. According to her, the institute made a major deviation from the relevant rules and the same must result in disaffiliation of the institute. The petitioner accordingly requested the first respondent to disaffiliate the said institute. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the representation was made on 20.04.2005, by narrating substantial grounds, the first respondent did not take any action and accordingly seeks necessary directions. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education. The writ petition does not deserve to be admitted for an important reason, namely, that the petitioner did not implead the institute, which she wanted the first respondent to disaffiliate. Secondly, the establishment and subsequent control of the institution and the management are governed by All India Council of Technical Education. The said agency is not made as party. Thirdly, the affiliation to a University and the role of the first respondent in such matter is restricted to the one of issuance of ‘no objection certificate’. Therefore, the question of requiring the first respondent to disaffiliate the said institute, does not arise. Even otherwise, the grievance pointed out by the petitioner mainly touches upon the internal disputes of a society. The petitioner has to work out her remedies elsewhere. At any rate, the petitioner has nothing to do with the management of the said institution, at present. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 28.11.2005 kdl