Judgment :- Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to give protection to run the Pavanar Tamilvazhi Mazhalayar Thodakappalli smoothly and safely without any interference, to pay a sum of Rs.5 lakhs as compensation and damages to the petitioner and to initiate departmental, criminal and contempt action against the third respondent and to initiate criminal and contempt action against the respondents 4 to 6. 2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner are as follows, (i) The Petitioner Trust took on an oral lease, the land in S.Nos.505 and 506/3 at Pallikaranai from the 5th respondent, power agent of the 6th respondent, who is the real owner of the land. In the year 1999, petitioner Trust commenced Pavanar Tamilvazhi Mazhalayar Thodakappalli with LKG, UKG and I Std and presently, there are 144 students studying in the school upto V Std. (ii) In these circumstances, 5th respondent took steps to re-classify the land earmarked for school, so as to sell the same as house sites, against which petitioner Trust filed W.P.No.6030 of 2004 to forbear the CMDA from changing the classification of the land. The said writ petition was dismissed on 14.6.2004 in view of the affidavit of the 5th respondent asserting that he was not seeking to change the classification of the land. (iii) The 6th respondent denied the existence of lease in favour of the petitioner Trust and hence O.S.NO.644 of 2004 was filed by the petitioner on the file of District Munsif Court, Alandur for declaration and also for permanent injunction restraining the respondents 5 and 6 from interfering with petitioners' possession and occupation of the property. The said suit is pending. As the 5th respondent refused to receive rent, petitioner filed O.S.NO.1038 of 2004 before the District Munsif Court, Alandur, for mandatory injunction to permit the petitioner to deposit the arrears of rent. That suit is also pending. (iv) Petitioner further states that the 5th respondent came to the school with goondas and interrupted with the smooth functioning of the school on various dates and in that regard complaints have been made to the Pallikaranai Police Station. That suit is also pending. (iv) Petitioner further states that the 5th respondent came to the school with goondas and interrupted with the smooth functioning of the school on various dates and in that regard complaints have been made to the Pallikaranai Police Station. (v) It is the case of the petitioner that the 4th respondent also laid a suit in O.S.No.226 of 2004 making the 6th respondent as defendant for permanent injunction restraining the 6th respondent from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the suit/school property. According to the petitioner, 4th respondent is none other than the co-brother of the 5th respondent and hence the said suit is a collusive one. In that suit 4th respondent obtained interim injunction against the 6th respondent. Petitioner Trust is not a party to the said suit and the said order has been obtained behind the back of the petitioner Trust. (vi) The grievance of the petitioner is that on 19.7.2005, respondents 4 and 5 along with the 3rd respondent/Inspector of Police, came to the school and demolished the entire school building, which has affected the children both physically and mentally. According to the petitioner, the action of the respondents 4 and 5 with the active aid of the 3rd respondent is a total high-handed and illegal one, as there is neither court order for demolition of the building nor there is an eviction order. In these circumstances, petitioner has come before this Court with this writ petition. 3. Mr.N.G.R.Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Trust complains that even though petitioner has lodged a complaint about the alleged high-handedness of the third respondent/Inspector of Police before the second respondent, no action has been taken with regard to the alleged arbitrary recovery of possession of the property by the respondents 4 to 6. 4. Mr.AL.Somayaji, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the first respondent brought to my notice that one student has already been admitted into Narayanapuram Panchayat Union Elementary School and 19 students have been admitted into Advent Christ Elementary School, Pallikaranai, as per the proceedings dated 27.7.2005 of the Assistant Educational Officer, Chitlapakkam and the remaining students will be accommodated in any one of the recognised schools at the earliest possible. 5. I have given careful consideration to the submissions made by counsel on both sides. 6. 5. I have given careful consideration to the submissions made by counsel on both sides. 6. Since the main grievance of the petitioner Trust is that the possession of the impugned land has been taken away from the petitioner pursuant to the alleged collusive decree, I am of the opinion that no writ will lie. 7. In these circumstances, this Court pass the following order, (a) The second respondent herein/the Commissioner of Police is directed to consider the complaint lodged against respondents 4 to 6 and also the inaction on the part of the 3rd respondent under Section 154(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and investigate into the matter and proceed further in accordance with law. (b) With regard to the direction seeking police protection to run the school smoothly, I am afraid that this Court cannot be a party to grant such a relief for the reasons that the petitioner institution is an unrecognised institution and that the petitioner institution as on date does not have proper infrastrustural facilities, as admittedly the school is being run under shamiana, which will not be in the interest of children. (c) With regard to the direction to initiate departmental and criminal action against the 3rd respondent/Inspector of Police, I direct the second respondent to take appropriate action subject to the decision that will be taken in the proceedings under Section 154(3) Crl.P.C. (d) Regarding the claim of the petitioner to pay compensation, I direct the petitioner to work out its rights in an appropriate civil proceeding. (e) The first respondent is directed to give proper instructions to the Educational Authorities to admit all the remaining students in the nearby recognised institutions expeditiously, in any event, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (f) The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected WPMPs are closed.