JUDGMENT
P.S. Mishra, C.J.
1. Heard.
2. Although learned single Judge has disposed of the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by a summary order saying that the point raised in the petition is covered by the Judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 25474 of 1996 dated 12-12-1996, we are satisfied, the direction issued for payment of admitted amounts due to the petitioner expeditiously and to refer the dispute as regards the disputed amounts to the Review Committee constituted under the Board’s Standing Orders is not correct. One of the settled principles of law is that any obligations which arise out of a contract are ordinarily not dealt with in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If there is any arbitration agreement, the claimant is entitled to raise demand for arbitration. If there is no arbitration agreement and there is no such statutory obligation for arbitration, the claimant can always institute a civil suit. It would rather be entertaining money claim on behalf of a person who is basing his claim on such statements and evidence, which he has to show in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and this Court would be most reluctant to entertain such a petition. In view of the above, we do find merit in the appeal. The impugned judgment, for the said reason, is set aside. It shall, however, be open to the petitioner – respondent to raise any claim for arbitration and/or to file a civil suit in respect of his claims in accordance with law.
3. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is set aside. The writ petition is dismissed, but on the facts and in the circumstances of the case without costs.
