ORDER : Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Additional Advocate General. 2. To our query, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioners are donors of the Rashtriya Gaushala Trust. The complaints are regarding mismanagement of the assets of that trust. Pleadings include allegations of felling trees without permission of the Government and other statutory authorities. If any trustee, beneficiary or donor of a public trust has any complaint which could lead to reliefs against the trustees, there are appropriate civil jurisdictions in terms of law to deal with such issues. In the realm of private trusts, the competent authorities as well as the civil courts have jurisdiction. Recourse to the extraordinary writ jurisdiction is uncalled for. It would be inappropriate for the writ court to venture into adjudication as to misfeasance, malfeasance or misconduct in relation to trust property. The domain of Public Interest Litigation cannot be swelled to rope in each and every allegation which could be thrown against any institution or office. 3. Therefore, without prejudice to the Petitioners seeking other remedies in accordance with law, including from any statutory authority having control over trust properties or from authorities which deal with any Government land or property for which Government sanction is required, this writ petition is dismissed.