Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J.—The petitioner, being aggrieved by the arbitrary action of the respondents in encashing the performance security and in cancelling the contract have filed two writ petitions before this Court, which have been clubbed together.

2. A preliminary objection has been raised with regard to the maintainability of the writ petitions on account of the arbitration clause contained in the contract. Before adverting to the preliminary objection, it would be appropriate to assimilate the factual controversy involved in the present writ petition.

3. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petitions are that the petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act and is involved in the business of infrastructural development of the road sector as well as in the business of user fee collection contracts on National Highways.

4. The National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1956) was promulgated for construction, development and maintenance of National Highways by the Central Government. Section 5 Act of 1956 provides that the development or maintenance of National Highways shall also be exercisable by an authority subor