A. GOPAL REDDY, J. ( 1 ) SINCE the point involved in the present writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order. ( 2 ) THE petitioners who are all members of the first respondent-Kuppam Rural electricity Co-operative Society (for short "the respondent-Society ) obtained electricity connections filed the present writ petitions seeking a direction to the respondents not to disconnect residential and agricultural electricity supply connections of the petitioners on extraneous grounds and consequential direction to supply electricity to the petitioners as per terms and conditions stating that they are the permanent residents of Jyothinagar and adavibadugur villages in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh State. The said villages fall under Kuppam Assembly Constituency. On constitution of the first respondent- society under A. P. Co-operative Societies act (for short "the Act") to supply electricity within the Kuppam Assembly Constituency, the petitioners were provided with electricity connections by laying transformers, electric supply lines since 1994 onwards. While so, the first respondent tried to stop power supply to the petitioners on the ground that some of the portion of the bordering village falls within the State of tamil Nadu. It is further stated that when there was no objection from neighbouring state when the respondent-society started electrifying the area by laying electric lines, they are not entitled to disconnect the power supply and at this stage if they are going to disconnect the power supply, the petitioners will suffer great hardship. ( 3 ) OPPOSING the claim of the petitioners, a counter-affidavit has been filed stating that the habitations of the petitioners are located not on the border of State of Andhra pradesh but out-side the border of State of andhra Pradesh, i. e. , within the State of tamil Nadu. So they are not the residents of adavibadugur village as their lands, wells and houses fall within the jurisdiction of the state of Tamil Nadu but not Andhra pradesh. The respondent-Society has laid transformers and supply lines on the presumption that the houses of the petitioners and their lands were within the territorial limits of State of Andhra Pradesh basing upon the applications submitted that they belong to State of Andhra Pradesh by giving survey numbers. Thus, the petitioners obtained connections by playing fraud. The respondent-Society has laid transformers and supply lines on the presumption that the houses of the petitioners and their lands were within the territorial limits of State of Andhra Pradesh basing upon the applications submitted that they belong to State of Andhra Pradesh by giving survey numbers. Thus, the petitioners obtained connections by playing fraud. Very recently, it was brought to the notice of the respondent-Society that the society had given connections both domestic and agricultural to those villages within the territorial limits of the State of Tamil Nadu. The respondent-Society was formed to fulfil the needs of the people of Kuppam territorial constituency but not the neighbouring constituency, much less neighbouring State. It is further stated that the petitioners fall within the territorial jurisdiction of Tamil Nadu State, but not andhra Pradesh State. The respondent society conducted a survey with the help of revenue authorities, survey party and discovered that the existing poles, transformers erected etc. , were laid within the territorial limits of the State of Tamil nadu by the respondent-Society. Therefore, the first respondent-Society tried to disconnect the connections which are not falling within the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is further stated that connections were obtained by playing fraud, therefore they are not to be regularized by this court under writ jurisdiction. All maps, sketches drawn by revenue authorities during the course of survey which were enclosed along with the counter-affidavit would show that the connections obtained by the petitioners are outside the Kuppam territorial constituency namely, within the State of Tamil Nadu. Even before taking any action, they rushed to this court and obtained interim direction not to disconnect power supply. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contends that once the first respondent- society laid electric lines for supply of electricity to the petitioners and supplied electricity since 1992 onwards, all of a sudden they cannot disconnect the power supply holding that the petitioners lands fall within the territorial limits of the State of tamil Nadu without there being any survey or without giving an opportunity to the petitioners. ( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the first respondent contends that the first respondent, which was registered under the societies Registration Act, is not an instrumentality of State, therefore the writ petition cannot be maintainable. ( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the first respondent contends that the first respondent, which was registered under the societies Registration Act, is not an instrumentality of State, therefore the writ petition cannot be maintainable. He further contends that as per the report of the mandal Revenue Officer, Kuppam dated 17-1-2002, whereunder it was observed that the transformers and service connections, which were provided by the first respondent-society, were both inside and outside the border, necessary proceedings will be initiated to disconnect the power supply to the persons who are residing outside the State of Andhra Pradesh. He further contends that if the petitioners are members of the first respondent-society and if there is any dispute with regard to the said disconnection, the same should be resolved as contemplated under Sec. 61 of the A. P. Co-operative Societies Act but not otherwise, therefore, the present writ petitions are not maintainable. ( 6 ) ADMITTEDLY, the petitioners are all members of the first respondent-society and they obtained necessary electricity connections by paying necessary charges as per the bye-laws of the society. The first respondent-society was registered to cater to the needs of Kuppam territorial constituency. The question whether the petitioners fall within the area of operation, namely, within the territorial limits of State of Andhra Pradesh and their lands are within the area of State of Andhra Pradesh and whether they are entitled to service connection or not have to be resolved by the arbitrator under Section 61 of the A. P. Cooperative Societies Act. It is well settled that factual aspects as to whether the constitution of the property and their location fall within the State of Andhra Pradesh or outside the territorial limits of Andhra Pradesh cannot be decided in a petition under Art. 226 of the constitution of India and the same has to be resolved by a Civil Court or any other forum as provided by the Bye-laws of the society, to which the petitioners are members. ( 7 ) THE petitioners filed the present writ petitions apprehending that the first respondent-society may likely to disconnect the electricity connections on the ground of survey undertaken by them. ( 7 ) THE petitioners filed the present writ petitions apprehending that the first respondent-society may likely to disconnect the electricity connections on the ground of survey undertaken by them. In view of the effective alternative remedy available to the petitioners under Section 61 of the A. P. Cooperative Societies Act, and as and when the first respondent-society disconnects the power supply, it is open for the petitioners to raise a dispute as contemplated under the provisions of the Act and it is for the arbitrator to decide the same. In that view of the matter, the present writ petitions filed by the petitioners cannot be maintainable and the same are accordingly dismissed with a liberty to work out their remedies before the appropriate forum. No costs.