JUDGMENT Hon'ble BHAGWATI, J.-By way of this writ petition, the petitioners defendants have implored to set-aside the orders dated 21st October, 2009 5 and 28th October, 2009 rendered by Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Class, Deeg District Bharatpur, whereby the learned Civil Judge has referred the dispute for settlement to mediation. 2. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and carefully perused the impugned orders and relevant material on record, it is noticed that the petitioners-defendants and the plaintiff- respondent no.2 entered into an agreement for construction of work Nonera Link (Flood) drain chain 0 to 412 Tehsil Kaman, District Bharatpur. Clause 23 of the Contract Agreement reveals that in the event of there being a dispute between the parties, the matter shall be referred to the Empowered Standing Committee. Pursuant to this agreement, the work order was given to the Contractor-respondent no.2, who did not complete the construction work within the prescribed time causing heavy loss to the petitioners-defendants. When the petitioners-defendants initiated proceedings against the plaintiff respondent No.2, he filed a civil suit for perpetual and mandatory injunction before the Court. The learned trial court, keeping in view the nature of dispute, referred the same to the mediation. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners canvassed that as per clause 23 of the contract agreement, the dispute ought to have been referred to the Empowered Standing Committee, but the learned trial court has arbitrarily invoked 25 the provisions under Sec. 89 of CPC and referred the matter to mediation. 4. It is a settled proposition of law that the power of issuing writs under Article 226 and the power of superintendence of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution are extraordinary powers, which are required to be exercised sparingly. This power cannot be exercised by a party when the efficacious remedy is available to him under the statute. Albeit, the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution are discretionary and no limits can be placed upon that discretion, but it must be exercised along recognized lines and not arbitrarily. In the instant case, the learned Civil Judge has categorically stated in his impugned orders that the dispute between the parties is of such a nature, which can be settled by conciliation or mediation. In the instant case, the learned Civil Judge has categorically stated in his impugned orders that the dispute between the parties is of such a nature, which can be settled by conciliation or mediation. The learned counsel for the petitioners insists that the matter ought to have been referred to the Empowered Standing Committee, but the learned Civil Judge seems to have invoked the powers under Section 89 of CPC and thought it proper to refer the dispute to the mediation. Whether the dispute is referred to the Empowered Standing Committee for its settlement or it is referred to a mediation, the result is likely to be the same. There may be two modes for getting the dispute settled. If the learned Civil Judge has passed the order referring the dispute to the mediation, the order cannot be said to be bad is the eye of law, but so far as the invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is concerned, the High Court is not required to act as the court at appeal or court of revision to correct the mere errors of law or of fact because this jurisdiction is merely supervisory. The impugned orders of the learned Civil Judge, Deeg are found to be apt and just, which suffer from no infirmity. I do not find any good ground to exercise the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution as it is intended to. be exercised sparingly. The writ petition is found to be totally devoid of merits and the same deserves to be dismissed at the thresh-hold. 5. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition stand dismissed in limine.