N.K. Jain, ACJ.

1. These writ-appeals have been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 20.3.2000 made in W.M.P.Nos.5389 to 5395, 5778, 6659 and 6682 and 6683 of 2000 in W.P.Nos.3528 to 3534, 3749, 4334 and 4355 of 2000, whereby the learned Single Judge directed the respondent to make fresh supply and stayed the impugned suspension orders dated 12. 2000 and 22. 2000 for 45 days pending writ petition.

2. The learned Additional Solicitor General of India for Union of India submits that the learned Single Judge has erred in holding the writ petitions are maintainable and staying the suspension order, when the contract, which is a non-statutory, is not amenable to writ jurisdiction. More so, there is a specific provision for arbitration in the contract itself. It is submitted that the learned Single Judge has not followed the judgment of a Division bench of this Court, which, while deciding an identical issue, held that no writ will lie in view of the arbitration clause. On merits, it is submitted by the learned Additional Solicitor General that the petitioners have not maintained the standards prescribed by the various control orders. As per the agreemen