IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.3021 of 2001 Between: M/s. Lakshmi Industries, reptd., by its Proprietor- Mahender Reddy, S/o.Narayana Reddy, 40 yrs, Business, H.No.4-94, Chandanagar, Ranga Reddy District. … Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Industries, reptd., by the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Ranga Reddy District, Balanagar, Hyderabad and another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P.Venkata Swamy. Counsel for the respondents: Sri K.Ram Mohan Maha Deva for Respondent No.2. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is ﬁled for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in cancelling the allotment made in favour of the petitioner in respect of Plot No.21/B, admeasuring 868 Sq.yards in Survey No.98 of Hafeezpet village (Hafeezpet Mini-Industrial Estate), Rajendernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, and allotting the same in favour of respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner also sought for a consequential direction to respondent No.1 to restore the said land in his favour. Heard Sri P.Venkata Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.Ram Mohan Mahadeva, learned counsel for respondent No.2, and perused the record. In the view I am taking, it is not necessary to refer to the facts in detail. It will suﬃce to note that the allotment of plot made in favour of the petitioner is covered by lease deed dated 20-10-1982 entered into between the District Collector, represented by General Manager, District Industrial Center, Ranga Reddy District and Sri R.Mahender Reddy on behalf of the petitioner. Clause 12 of the said lease deed reads as under: “The lessor and the lessee mutually agree that any dispute over the implementation or interpretation of the conditions herein shall be referred to the Public Prosecutor, Government of Andhra Pradesh or such other Oﬃcer of the Government as may be authorized in his behalf, for arbitration, whose decision will be ﬁnal and binding on both parties”. Learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that the dispute relating to cancellation of allotment squarely arises out of the said lease deed. The petitioner failed to give any reason for not availing the remedy of arbitration as agreed to between the parties under the said lease deed. Since the petitioner has an appropriate remedy of getting the dispute adjudicated through arbitration, I am not inclined to adjudicate the Writ Petition on merits. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to seek reference of the dispute for arbitration as per the above- reproduced Clause of the lease deed. -------------------------- --------------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date: 15-9-2008 MNR