JUDGMENT M. Srinivasan, C. J.:—The only prayer of the petitioner is to enforce a contract between the petitioner and the first respondent-Company, as is evident by Annexure P-I. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, Annexure P-l is not a contract, but is only a letter of intent. In our opinion, it is nothing but a contract, which sets out the terms dealership, which will operate as per the terms of Annexure P-l. The respondent- Company has to provide a suitable plot of land, duly developed as Retail Outlet with Sales Room, Storage Tank and Pump, as also air facility for operating the dealership. The correspondence between the parties and the records placed before us show that the respondents are not in a position to fix any particular site as suitable site. One of the sites for which the petitioner requested the respondents to agree, as a suitable site, was found to be not suitable by a Committee appointed by the respondents, as is evident from Annexure R-l. It is seen from the said Annexure that the Committee has directed the Senior Divisional Manager to identify some other suitable sites and if required, he can take the help of Patwari in identifying the new sites. The Committee has also directed issue of fresh advertisement inviting offers of land and in the alternative the Committee has directed the Senior Divisional Manager to approach the Government for acquiring a suitable piece of land. The Annexure to the reply shows that the first respondent has taken sufficient steps for getting a suitable site in order to give it to the petitioner for running the Petrol Pump. In such circumstances, we do not find any justification to grant the prayer of the petitioner. It is open to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate forum for enforcing the contract between him and the first respondent, if so advised. 2. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder and as per the rejoinder, there was an earlier Committee, which had inspected the site. But the records produced before us show that there was only one Committee, which found I the site to be unsuitable. Even then, it is only matter of contract, which cannot be enforced under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. Writ petition dismissed.