ORDER : 1. The Writ Petition is filed for directing the first respondent to form an Independent Redressal Committee consisting of the respondents 1 to 3, 5 to 9, 12 to 15, 17 to 18 to act as an official guarantor to ensure absolute protection of religious, linguistic, cultural, social, human rights of the co-petitioners and their fellow men-350 families of Telugu Speaking Linguistic Minorities, Catholic Christian faithful attached to 186 years enriched Amala Annai Aalayam, situated in S. Nos. 61, 62, 63, 64, 201 of Ravaththa Nallur Kandigai Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kanchipuram District 2. Heard the Party-in-Person. 3. Upon hearing the party-in-person and perusing the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it can be seen that the grievance of the petitioners is that these linguistic minority persons have settled in the aforesaid village long since in Uthiramerur Taluk. However, the District diocese as well as the Archdiocese have since been not sensitive to their demands and have not redressed the repeated demands of opening the said Church by appointing Parish Priest to conduct the ceremonies at discharge and thereby ensuring that their basic right of worship and following the religious practices as guaranteed under the Constitution of India to the said people be ensured. It can also be seen that earlier when the petitioners made representation to the public authorities, ultimately an order was passed by the Sub Collector-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kancheepuram, on 28.02.2025. The operative portion of the order is extracted hereunder for ready reference:- “Therefore, the petitioners may approach the Diocese of Chengulpet and the Archdiocese of madras-Mylapore to seek the specific relief they have requested concerning the conduct of regular religious services and the appointment of a priest at Amala Annai Alayam Church. It is within the scope of these ecclesiastical bodies to address and facilitate the necessary arrangements that align with canonical practices and the spiritual needs of the community. This directive is given in recognition of the limitations of administrative interventions in matters that are intrinsically linked to religious administration and the internal governance of religious institutions. The involvement of these religious authorities is crucial not only in addressing the immediate concerns raised but also in ensuring the long term spiritual and communal harmony of the congregants at Amala Annai Aalayam Church”. 4. The involvement of these religious authorities is crucial not only in addressing the immediate concerns raised but also in ensuring the long term spiritual and communal harmony of the congregants at Amala Annai Aalayam Church”. 4. The party-in-person would submit that even after the direction of the Sub Collector, absolutely, no progress is made and the diocese of Chenglepet and the Archdiocese of Madras-Mylapore are not heeding any of the requests, that are made by the petitioners, nor the orders passed by the authorities. Therefore, the party-in-person, who would ultimately submit that this Court should direct the said authorties, to open up the Church, appoint Parish Priest and ensure that the rights of worship and the other rights of these people, are taken care of. As per the Canon Law, even if 10% of the population in a particular locality are linguistic minorities, they are entitled to a special church and Inspite of such Rules being specifically followed by the diocese, in the instant case, in violation of Canon Law and the Rules, a separate Church is formed in a very distant place and the request of the 350 families are not looked into. 5. Thus, it can be seen that the grievance as made out by the party-in-person and the affidavit, that is filled in support of the writ petition in detail, is as against the diocese and the archdiocese. Those are the private entities. Even if they violate the Canon law or their own Rules, the petitioners have to enforce the same by filing appropriate civil suit and this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot issue a writ to the said private entities. The party- in-person submits that the fundamental rights are granted under the Constitution of India. The said rights can be enforced under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, if it is interfered by the State or any of its authorities. If the diocese in violation of the principles enshrined in the Canon law or their own Rules does not open and operate a particular Church, it is for the petitioners to claim right as against the said diocese and the said grievances can be ventilated only in civil proceedings and not by way of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As a matter of fact, the party-in-person would also bring to the notice of this Court that on the earlier occasion a civil suit was filed in O.S.No.101 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Utheramerur. 6. A perusal of the same, it can be seen that an order of permanent injunction as against the defendants therein has been granted in favour of the plaintiff. It can also be seen that yet another suit in O.S.No.98 of 2008 was also filed and a decree dated 27.12.2011 was also passed. It can be seen that the said decree was also for the permanent injunction against the defendants therein. 7. In view thereof, it is the case of the petitioners that the action which is complained against the said private entities, falls within the subject matter of the said decrees and the said decrees can be executed. If the petitioners claim the other rights as against the diocese itself or as against the archdiocese, an appropriate suit with proper relief can also be filed as against the said organizations in the manner known to law and keeping the said liberty open to the petitioners in the manner known to law, I am of the view that this Writ Petition cannot be entertained, as the relief prayed for is essentially directed against the private individuals and the authorities cannot interfere in the matter except in law and order situations. The writ petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.