IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 7373 of 2010 Date of Decision: 29.4.2010. Shikhar Chetna Sangathan, Shastri Marg, Vidya Nagar, Meham Road, Bhiwani through its President Sushil Kumar Verma & others --Petitioners Versus Union of India and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. K.K. Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The petitioners are societies who were engaged by the respondents to provide the services under the Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan, a Central Govt. sponsored scheme in the rural areas. They entered into formal agreements with the Govt. One of the copy of the agreement is placed on record as (Annexure P-2). It appears that the petitioners lodged their claims for payments regarding the establishment of the centres and imparting education to the rural children. The State seems to have conducted the verification to ascertain the genuineness of the claim and on that basis did not release the payments. The petitioners came to this Court by filing CWP No. 8062 of 2008 which came to be disposed of by this Court vide order dated 14.5.2008 directing the State Level Grant-in-Aid Committee to decide the representation of the petitioners. It is relevant to note here that under the agreement executed by the petitioners with the respondents under condition no.20 which relates to settlement of disputes it is stated that the State Level Grant-in-Aid Committee shall be the final authority to settle the disputes. It was under these circumstances that this Court while disposing CWP. No. 7373 of 2010 -2- of the writ petition directed the State Level Grant-in-Aid Committee to decide the representation of the petitioners. The representation of the petitioners now stands decided by a speaking order dated 25.7.2008 by the District Elementary Education Officer-cum-District Project Officer, S.S.A, Sirsa. While passing the aforesaid order it has been noticed that on verification various alarming facts have come to the notice of the authority which inter alia includes centres not traceable at the time of verification, centres not at all started and so many other deficiencies/discrepancies as noticed in the aforesaid order (Annexure P-16). The aforesaid order was followed by another notice dated 12.3.2010 whereby the petitioners and other such organizations have been asked to assist for verification of the facts. Both these orders Annexures P-16 & P-21 are under challenge in the present writ petition. Admittedly, the petitioners' claim emanates from the agreements executed by them with the respondents. It is primarily a contractual liability. Apart from that while passing the impugned order (Annexure P-16) a number of findings have been returned against the petitioners. These findings can only be rebutted in regular proceedings as these are the findings of facts and need elaborate and detailed evidence/trial. It is not prudent for the Writ Court to interfere in such matters. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach the Civil Court. Prayer allowed. Dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 29.4.2010. lucky