1. An advertisement notice dated 6th October, 2005, was issued for award of retail outlet dealership under Kissan Seva Scheme at Hangulgund, District An-antnag. Petitioner applied for the same, was called for interview before selection committee and letter of intent, dated 23rd January, 2006, was issued in his favour for award of retail outlet. Thereafter, petitioner was asked to file No Objection Certificate from concerned departments which was obtained and submitted. The petitioner, thereafter invested Rs. 25.00 lacs for purchase of land, its development, construction, fencing etc., but presently respondents have issued the communication dated 2nd June, 2009, whereby letter of intent was cancelled without hearing petitioner. 2. Respondents have filed the reply and contested the same on the ground that no right, not to speak of fundamental right of petitioner's stand infringed and no opportunity was required to be given to him before making the impugned communication. The basis for cancellation was that Kissan Seva Kendra Scheme cannot be installed at a place which is stone's throw away from National Highway and location in dispute falls on National Highway IB. Further it is averred that site, chosen for installing the Kissan Seva Kendra retail outlet, did not comply the mandate of the requisite rules and regulations, rather the same violates the rules and regulations, therefore was not okayed. The respondents challenge the locus-standi of the petitioner to file present petition, it is averred that no contract was concluded. The letter of intent cannot be taken as a 'firm offer' of dealership and that dealership had to be confirmed/formalized by an appointment letter followed by the signing of the dealership agreement. That petitioner has no right to file the writ petition against the respondents. 3. Heard counsel for the parties. 4. With the consensus of learned counsel for parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage itself. 5. It appears that disputed question of facts are involved in the matter which cannot be gone into, in a writ petition. Mr. Javed Iqbal, learned counsel for petitioner, has admitted that Kissan Seva Kendra Retail Outlet cannot be opened on National Highway and prayed that respondents be directed to withdraw the impugned notification and allow the petitioner to establish a retail outlet. 6. Mr. Javed Iqbal, learned counsel for petitioner, has admitted that Kissan Seva Kendra Retail Outlet cannot be opened on National Highway and prayed that respondents be directed to withdraw the impugned notification and allow the petitioner to establish a retail outlet. 6. Keeping in view the discussion made hereinabove, 1 am of the view that no agreement is concluded between the parties and no retail outlet of Kissan Seva Kendra Scheme, can be installed at Highway Way or State Road. Petitioner has not earned any right to make a claim for allowing him to execute the job. If at all, the petitioner has suffered any damage, he can claim compensation for the same, and that too by availing proper remedy. 7. The writ petition, in the depicted backdrop, is held to be without any merit, therefore, dismissed. However, it is made clear that dismissal of writ petition shall not debar the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy.