JUDGMENT :- (1) W. P. No. 18786 of 2009 is filed for a writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not implementing the orders issued by the district Collector dated 18. 8. 2007 and 29. 3. 2008, for protection of the land in survey Nos. 194/1 and 12 of Begumpet village and for removal of encroachments, as illegal and arbitrary. (2) WP No. 26420 of 2008 is filed by the same petitioners challenging the memo, dated 17. 10. 2008 issued by the Deputy collector and Tahsildar, Balanagar Mandal, ranga Reddy District, 4th respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the status report issued by himself. Directions are also sought against respondents 1 to 4 for stopping the construction activities being taken by the 5th respondent over the land in survey No. 194/12 of Begumpet Village. (3) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in w. P. No. 26420 of 2008. (4) THE land in Survey Nos. 194/1 to 12 was the property of lady Vicar-ul-umrah. It was the subject-matter of proceedings before the Court of Wards. The same was released from the Court of Wards through the order of the Government in G. O. Ms. No. 341, dated 17. 2. 1959. (5) THROUGH proceedings dated 1. 10. 2003, the Chief Commissioner of Land administration, Hyderabad appointed the petitioners, said to be on the request of the legal heirs of lady Vicar-ul-umrah, as "coordinators-cum-protectors" for the properties in Survey Nos. 194/1 to 12. Based on this, the petitioners made several efforts to protect the paigah properties. The status report submitted by the 4th respondent was filed in this Court in W. P. No. 18786 of 2008 stating that out of Acs. 8. 04 guntas of land in Survey No. 194/12, Acs. 5. 00 is covered by houses and in an open land of acs. 3. 04 guntas, the 5th respondent has erected its board. Through the impugned memo, the 4th respondent stated that the land, where the 5th respondent is constructing the Sewerage Treatment Plant, is in Survey no. 43, T. S. No. 4, Block-A, Ward No. 100 and it is not part of Survey No. 194/12. The petitioners contend that the view taken by the 4th respondent through the impugned memo is contrary to the status report submitted by himself. 43, T. S. No. 4, Block-A, Ward No. 100 and it is not part of Survey No. 194/12. The petitioners contend that the view taken by the 4th respondent through the impugned memo is contrary to the status report submitted by himself. They further contend that the respondents are not entitled to encroach into the land in Survey No. 194/12 and it is their duty to protect the possession of paigah properties. (6) ON behalf of respondents 1 to 4, a counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that the land in Survey No. 194/12 was already released from the Court of Wards and the writ petitions are not maintainable in law. The identity of the land is also disputed. (7) HEARD Sri T. S. Anand, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned government Pleader for Revenue and Sri m. Surender Rao, learned Counsel for the 5th respondent. (8) THE endeavour of the petitioners is to protect the land in Survey Nos. 194/1 to 12 from being encroached by the private individuals or by the agencies of the government. A serious dispute exists as to the very locus standi of the petitioners. It is a matter of record that the land was released from the Court of Wards way back in the year 1959 through G. O. Ms. No. 341. With that, the respective owners become entitled to enjoy, retain or dispose of the property. If there are any internal disputes among the legal heirs, they have to approach the concerned Courts of Law and resolve the same. Once the property is released from the Court of Wards, the Government ceases to have any obligation to protect such lands. The circumstances, under which the petitioners came to be appointed as "protectors and coordinators" are a bit curious. The chief Commissioner of Land Administration passed an order dated 1. 10. 2003 appointing the petitioners as protectors. The relevant paragraph reads as under: on the request of the legal heirs of Paigah vicarual Umrah and also to safeguard the paigah lands under the control of court of Wards i. e. C. C. L. A. on trial basis in consideration with the request of the persons who are willing to render their services on honorary and temporary basis without any salary or remuneration or lumpsum amount from Paigah Vicarul Umrah court of Wards. And also willing, assist and to work as coordinator-cum-protector, to protect the Paigah landed properties and houses and also to assist the rental collections of Paigah Vicarul Umrah and also to help in the eviction of encroachments, and also to gather the information regarding the present status of the properties on temporary basis hereby appointed as coordinator-cum-protector of following persons on temporary and honorary and without any consolidate pay and free of service. 1. Nawab Mohd. Mohiuddin Khan S/o. Mohd. If the kharuddin Khan 2. Mohd. Sadiq Shareef S/o. Mohd. Shareef the powers and duties conferred upon them are as under: he is liable to protect the land from encroachment and he will assist the rental collection and he is responsible to report the any encroachments and illegal selling of the properties of Paigah Vicarul Umrah and he is responsible to approach before the MRO's Office and Police Officers and mch Authorities for safeguarding the paigah landed properties and houses mentioned in AO Gazette No. 3, dated 26. 1. 1961 and report the factual reports to the concerned officers time to time. Further they are responsible to follow the rules and regulations mentioned in the Court of wards Act 1350 F and if any thing found wrong they are responsible to pay the fine as well as punishment if any suggested by the Court of Wards authorities in future. (9) IT needs to be noted that neither any proceedings were pending before the chief Commissioner of Land Administration nor did he refer to any provision of law, for appointing the petitioners. It is only on the basis of the order, dated 1. 10. 2003, that the petitioners have been making representations before the various authorities and instituting proceedings. As a matter of fact, in their representation, dated 6. 10. 2008, the petitioners describe themselves as the G. P. A. holders of the paigah lands/properties. (10) TWO important requirements that are essential in any proceedings vis-a-vis the properties are (a) nature of the property; and (b) the entitlement of the individual claiming rights on it. If it is a private property, hardly does the Government have any obligation to protect it. It is for those, who are vested with the rights in it, that have to take steps to protect their properties. If it is a private property, hardly does the Government have any obligation to protect it. It is for those, who are vested with the rights in it, that have to take steps to protect their properties. As regards the persons, who can initiate proceedings, it must be clear that they hold vested interest in it and it is only then, that they can institute proceedings before various Courts. Any shortfall in this regard is likely to have its own effect on the very locus standi. Viewed from this angle, it becomes clear that the property in question is private in nature and the Government doesn't have any obligation to protect it. (11) SO far as the locus standi is concerned, except that the petitioners are appointed as "coordinators and protectors", they do not have any independent right, vis-a-vis the land. The order under which they have been appointed is not traceable to any provision of law much less the authority is vested with the power to do so. (12) THEREFORE, the writ petitions cannot be entertained and they are accordingly dismissed. It shall however be open to the persons, who have interest in the property, to institute proceedings before the concerned courts or authorities, and enforce their rights. There shall be no order as to costs.