Short Note : 1. In the opinion of this Court, even if the power under Article 226 of the Constitution were available, this is not a fit case for the exercise of that power. The main dispute between the parties is one of fact which cannot be determined without evidence. The petitioner's case is that he has paid the full price of all the tendu leaves kept in the godown. The other side contends that the payment of price is not full since the quantity of tendu leaves is much more than that which has been paid for by the petitioner. The basic dispute between the parties is, therefore, about the tendu leave kept in the godown. In the opinion of this Court, the disputed questions of fact can be more appropriately gone into in a civil suit and a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution is in appropriate for this purpose. Petition dismissed.