Devendrajeet Vadra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

constitution - writ against private body - articles 12 and 226 of constitution of india - writ petition does not lie against a company registered under the indian companies act as it is a private body and not an instrumentality of the state - writ of habeas corpus lies against a private body. - - 3. it is well-settled, that ordinarily, no writ lies against a private body except a writ of habeas corpus vide dr.orderm. katju, j.1. the petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent no. 3. m/s. motion pictures association, mangal market, chandni chowk, new delhi to treat, the petitioner as one of its members as per article of association.2. in our opinion, this writ petition is not maintainable as the respondent no. 3 is a private body being a company registered under the indian companies act. 3. it is well-settled, that ordinarily, no writ lies against a private body except a writ of habeas corpus vide dr. a.k. gupta v. rajghat education centre, 2003 (1) awc 503 and general manager, modipon fibre co. v. narendra pal 2003 alj 980, etc. 4. in paragraph 5 of the petition, it is stated that as per the constitution and articles of association of respondent no. 3 unless one is a member of the association one cannot be provided with any film for exhibition of films from any other member, who is engaged in distribution of films in u. p. and delhi. 5. in our opinion, a private bodycan always make a rule restricting itsmembership on certain conditions.the respondent no. 3 is not aninstrumentality of the state and hence,this writ petition is not maintainableand it is dismissed.