-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. WRIT PETITION (LODGING) NO.24 OF 2008 Jog Engineering Limited & Anr. : Petitioners V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Respondents ... Mr.Abhay Abhyankar, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Jaideep Lele and Mr.Raj Mehta i/b. M/s.RKM Legal Services for the petitioners. Mr.D.A.Nalawade, Government Pleader for respondent no.1. Mr.Milind Sathe, Senior Advocate, with Mr.C. Ardhesir i/b. M/s.Kanga & Co., for respondent no.2. ... CORAM : BILAL NAZKI & S.A.BOBDE,JJ. DATE : JANUARY 24, 2008. P.C. 1. This is a Writ Petition challenging the termination of Work Order no.1853/1999 dated 28.5.1999. The notice of termination had been given on 20.12.2007. This termination has been challenged on various grounds. However, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the respondents, we find that there are disputed questions of fact and whether the termination was legal or illegal cannot be decided by this Court. 2. On the last occasion, we had directed the learned -: 2 :- counsel for the respondents to seek instructions as to whether the respondents would prefer to refer the matter for arbitration as the learned counsel for the petitioners had shown his willingness for referring the matter to arbitration. The learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has drawn our attention to clause 67.1 which lays down that no arbitration is allowed in case of disputes between the parties and, as such, as a matter of fact, the respondents had decided not to refer the disputes to arbitration. However, there is a clause, being clause 67.2, which refers to limited arbitration and, in our opinion, it is permissible to the Deputy Chief Engineer and the Managing Director to decide certain matters during the pendency of the contract and if the contract is terminated, the matter cannot be referred to arbitration, particularly when the respondents are not ready for such a course to be adopted. 3. In this view of the matter, we feel that the Writ Petition needs to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, the petitioners shall be at liberty to take such remedy in civil law which may be available to them in law. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S.A. BOBDE, J.)