THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6802 of 2011 Date:16.03.2011 Between: M/s. Devatha Samkshema Sangham ..... Petitioner AND The Superintending Engineer, Vijayawada and another .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P. Prabhakara Rao Counsel for Respondents: Sri S.V. Ramana, for Sri O. Manohar Reddy, standing counsel for APTRANSCO The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in issuing letter dated 19.02.2011, whereby the petitioner’s agreement dated 01.08.2010 was terminated. At the hearing Sri P. Prabhakara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the action of respondent No.1 in terminating the contract is illegal and arbitrary. I am afraid, this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India would not entertain a writ petition filed questioning termination of a non-statutory contract. Ordinarily, the aggrieved party to a non-statutory contract is entitled to avail the common law remedies such as civil suit or arbitration, in case there is any such provision, for redressal of his grievance. (See Radha Krishna Agarwal v. State of Bihar[1], State of U.P. v. Bridge & Roof Co. (India) Ltd.,[2], National Highways Authority of India vs. Ganga Enterprises[3] and Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corpn. vs. Gayatri Construction Co.[4].) Therefore, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the common law remedies as indicated above. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.8459 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 16th March, 2011 GHN [1] AIR 1977 SC 1496 [2] (1996) 6 SCC 22 [3] (2003) 7 SCC 410 [4] (2008) 8 SCC 172