C.W.P. No.18971 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.18971 of 2011 Date of Decision.13.10.2011 Smt. Simranjeet Kaur .....Petitioner Versus Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and another .....Respondents Present: Mr. K.B. Raheja, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition challenges the order of cancellation of dealership on alleged gross irregularities elicited by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation against the petitioner. Even the order of termination makes out reference to the fact that if the petitioner is interested in raising a dispute and if not satisfied with the adjudication made, he will have a remedy prescribed under the dealership agreement under Clause 66 for resort to an arbitral process. The cancellation order brings to fore factual issues, which, in my view, would not be appropriate to be interfered with under Article 226 jurisdiction although there are decisions, which abound that Article 226 jurisdiction is not lost even when there is a specific clause for arbitration. I would find the writ jurisdiction to be inappropriate in a case where the order had been passed by a person of competent authority and who has dealt with the objection raised to the show cause notice and has taken a decision. C.W.P. No.18971 of 2011 -2- 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues vehemently that the petitioner shall be at least protected in his possession till the impugned order directs the removal of the facilities immediately. The petitioner will have also appropriate remedy to obtain protection under the provisions of the Arbitration Act itself. 3. The writ petition is dismissed with the above observations. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 13, 2011 Pankaj*