<gJ HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SingleBench ; Hon'ble Shri S.R. Nayak, C.J. Writ Petition No.756 OF 2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS versus 1. 2. ^G^- M/s B.P. Dwivedj, Through its Proprietor B.P. Dwivedi, S/o Shri R. S. Dwivedi, Aged about 42 years, R/o B-20 V.I.P. Estate, Vidhan Sabha Road, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Water Resources Dept., D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) Chief Engineer, Mahanadi Godawari Kachhar Ralpur, Water Resourees Dept, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) Present : Mr.Yashwant Tiwari, learned counset for the petitioner. Mr. Utkarsh Verma, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents/State. ORAL ORDER (Passedon 15'" February, 2006) The dispute brought before this Court is arising out of terminatton of ordlnary works contract. As could be seen from the impugned order, the contract was terminated by the respondent acting under Clause 4.3.3.3 of the Agreement for not carrying out the repairs/reconstruction after the damage in the Chute Falt. It is also the case of the respondents that they have sustained damages estimated at Rs.40 Lakhs. By the impugned endorsement addressed to all Executive <6^T —z- H Engineers of the Water Resources Division, they have been directed that if any payment is required to be made in favour of the petitioner, the payment should be withheld towards the damages sustained by the Department. 2. 1 heard Mr. Yashwant Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner for quite sometime. Though the counsel would make an endeavour to address the Court on merits of the dispute, 1 do not think it appropriate for this Court to undertake adjudication of the merits of the matter, arising out of the termination of the ordinary contract, in a summary proceeding under Artlcle 226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioner has sustained any legal injury or damage on account pf the aileged wrongful act of the respondents, it is open for the pet'itioner to work-out private law review remedies, such as, declaration and damages. In that view of the matter, 1 decline to entertain this writ petition, however, reserving liberty to the petitioner to work-out his !ega! remedies, as indicated above, before the jurisdictional Civii Court. All the contentions raised by the parties in this wrlt petition are left open to be agitated before the Civil Court. Nocosts. Sd/- Chief Justice GRPRji