ORDER 1. They are heard on IA No. 4875/07 application filed by the respondents for dismissing the petition on the ground that a writ petition under Article 226/227 of Constitution is not maintainable against the respondent Society as it is not "State" come within the meaning under Article 12 of the Constitution amenable a writ jurisdiction of this Court. 2. Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order Annexure PI dated 8.2.2007 by which petitioner has been directed to hand over charge of Secretary of the Society to one Shri Ramesh Agrawal. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been appointed as Secretary by the respondent Society in the year 1975. With effect from October 2001 he is being paid Rs. 5,000/- per month as honorarium. The society in question is receiving certain grant-in-aid from the State Government. Inter alia contending that the services of the petitioner as Secretary cannot be brought to an end in the manner as done without hearing him and without following the principles of natural justice, petitioner has filed this petition before this Court. 3. On notice being issued respondent have filed the return and it is stated by them that the respondent Society is not a State aided society, it is only receiving limited grant-in-aid under the M.P. Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon TathaAnya Karamchariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) Adhiniyam, 1978 for the limited purpose of paying salary to the teachers, the activities of the society are controlled and governed by bye-laws which are non-statutory in nature and as the petitioner is only a Secretary of the Society holding the post on payment of Honorarium writ petition before this Court is not maintainable. Accordingly respondent seeks for dismissal of the petition. 4. Shri Katare submitted that as the services of the petitioner have been brought to an end without hearing him and contrary to the provision of bye-laws this Court has jurisdiction to deal with the matter. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties on the question of maintainability of this petition, it is seen that petitioner is only holding the post of Secretary. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties on the question of maintainability of this petition, it is seen that petitioner is only holding the post of Secretary. According to clause 9 of the bye-laws of the society the governing body is empowered to appoint Secretary and to vest in him such powers, as may be thought proper, the bye-laws of the society are not statutory in nature and the respondent society is not a statutory organization, it is private society registered under the M.P. Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam and it is running certain educational institute, petitioner is not working as a teacher but is only a Secretary discharging the function vested in him as per the bye-laws and his appointment is not on payment of any salary but according to petitioner's own showing he is paid certain honorarium. The question, therefore, is as to whether on the grounds of violation of the bye-laws interference can be made by this Court. It is well settled in law that a non-statutory bye-laws cannot be enforced by a writ of mandamus and a petition seeking enforcement of any condition of such a bye-laws is not maintainable. The society in question is a private registered society and it is the bye-laws which governs the terms and conditions of the petitioner's working as Secretary, the byelaws is not a creation of a statute, it does not have any statutory sanction. That being so, I am of the considered view that a writ petition directly before this Court challenging the removal of the petitioner from the post of Secretary on the ground that it is violation of bye-laws is not maintainable. This Court can only issue a writ for enforcement of any statutory right available to the petitioner or for the purpose of compelling the respondents to perform a public duty which the respondent society is required to perform in the discharge of its normal function. The relief claimed by the petitioner in this petition does not relate to discharge of any public function by the respondents nor is the relief claimed by the petitioner based on any statutory provision, rule or bye-laws having the force of law. 6. Under such circumstances petitioner has to seek remedy available under the M.P. Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam for challenging his removal from the post of Secretary. 6. Under such circumstances petitioner has to seek remedy available under the M.P. Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam for challenging his removal from the post of Secretary. Finding the objection raised in IA No. 4875/07 to be sustainable the same is allowed. This petition is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy available of filing a suit or any other remedy under the M.P. Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam. Accordingly this petition is dismissed with the aforesaid liberty.