JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. By way of this petition, the petitioner-Society has prayed for the following reliefs. “(A) Writ of mandamus may kindly be issued thereby direction the respondents to provide employment under the Scheme of Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Oustees of ACC Cement Factor Gaggal, District Bilaspur (HP) and to grant compensation and to deploy/engage the trucks of the families of the Gram Panchayats Baroti, Dehar, Kangu, Dhawal, Jarol, Jambla, Slapad and Salwana which are affected by the establishment of the Associate Cement Companies Ltd. Barmana, District Bilaspur (HP). (B) Entire original record pertaining to the present case may also be called for. (C) Cost of the petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents. (D) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction in view of the facts and circumstances of the case as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.” 2. The petitioner before this Court claims itself to be a registered society under The Himachal Pradesh Society Registration Act, 2006 and primarily its grievance is that the work of transportation of clinker etc. is not being provided to its members by respondent No. 4 despite the fact that they are covered by the scheme for the resettlement and rehabilitation of oustees’ of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, District Bilaspur. In my considered view, this petition is totally mis-conceived. A perusal of the scheme ‘Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Oustees’ of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, District Bilaspur, which is on record as Annexure P-3 demonstrates that the purpose of the scheme is primarily for the resettlement and rehabilitation of oustees of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, District Bilaspur. “Oustees” stand defined in Clause (2) of the Scheme, as per which, the definition of the oustees is as under. “Oustees: For the purpose of this scheme, means a person who has been deprived of his house, land or both on account of acquisition proceedings in connection with the construction of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal and entitled to compensation in lieu thereof and includes his successors interest.” 3. It is not in dispute that persons whose cause is being espoused by the petitioner-Society are not covered under the definition of ‘oustees’. It is not in dispute that persons whose cause is being espoused by the petitioner-Society are not covered under the definition of ‘oustees’. Keeping in view the fact that scheme in issue is primarily for resettlement and rehabilitation of oustees and as members of the petitioner-Society are not covered under the said Scheme, in my considered view, member of the petitioner-Society do not have any right to claim the benefits which otherwise are envisaged under the Scheme to be conferred up on the oustees of the ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, District Bilaspur. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that scheme cannot be read myopically and each and every person who is affected by the establishment of the Factory is covered by the same which is evident from the fact that it is mentioned in the said Scheme that the same should be extended to whole of the area affected or likely to be affected as a result of construction of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal. I am afraid that the scheme cannot be read in the mode and manner in which learned Counsel for the petitioner wants the scheme to be read. Clause (1) of the Scheme is quoted herein below. “1. short title extent and Commencement:- This Scheme may be called the Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Oustees of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, (Grant of Land) Scheme, 1980. (ii) It shall extend to the whole of the area affected or likely to be affected as a result of construction of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal in Bilaspur District. (iii) It shall come into force at once.” 5. A perusal of the clause as is contained in the Scheme demonstrates that intent of this Clause is that basically the scheme is for resettlement and rehabilitation of Oustees of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, District Bilaspur and all oustees are covered under the scheme, who may be in any area which is affected or is likely to be affected as a result of construction of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, District Bilaspur. Not only this, Sub-Clause (ii) of Clause 1 is not an independent Clause but is a part of Clause (1) i.e. Short title and commencement of the Scheme. 6. Not only this, Sub-Clause (ii) of Clause 1 is not an independent Clause but is a part of Clause (1) i.e. Short title and commencement of the Scheme. 6. The second contention which has been raised by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that ACC Cement Factory is discriminating between similarly situated persons because on the one hand, it is denying employment to the members of the petitioner-Society by not affording the business of transportation of clinker etc. to them by engaging their trucks, on the other hand, it has engaged the trucks of other persons who are also not oustees as is defined in scheme ‘Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Oustees’ of ACC Cement Factory, Gaggal, District Bilaspur. In my considered view, this issue cannot be gone into in writ jurisdiction as the same is a disputed question of fact. Not only this, this contention is not even otherwise substantiated by any cogent material on record by the petitioner. 7. Besides this, as respondent-ACC Cement Company Limited is neither a ‘State’ nor ‘other authority’, as is envisaged under Article 12 of the Constitution, in my considered view, therefore, a writ of mandamus even otherwise cannot be issued in this respect to the said Company. In case the petitioner has any grievance then the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate Court of law to establish and prove the said contention of the petitioner but the same, in my considered view, cannot be done in proceedings under Article 226 of Constitution of India. 8. Further, the contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner that Registrar, Cooperatives Societies, is not performing its statutory duties by not directing respondent No. 4-Company to engage trucks of members of the petitioner-Society is also totally mis-conceived. Respondent No. 4 is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act and it is not a Society registered under The Himachal Pradesh Cooperatives Societies Act, 1968. As such, in my considered view, Registrar Cooperatives Societies, even otherwise cannot issue such like directions to the respondent No. 4-Company in exercise of powers vested in it under The Himachal Pradesh Cooperatives Societies Act, 1968. 9. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that any legal right, leave aside fundamental right of its members has been infringed by respondent No. 4-Company. 9. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to substantiate that any legal right, leave aside fundamental right of its members has been infringed by respondent No. 4-Company. Who is to be engaged by respondent No. 4-Company for the transportation of its products is neither to be directed nor to be dictated by this Court. Only exception can be if there is an agreement entered into by the said Company with the State Government to the effect that it shall be offering the business of transportation of its products to a particular class of persons and the said agreement is being violated by the Company, then obviously, the affected persons can approach firstly the State Government and then this Court praying for a mandamus that State and respondent No. 4-Company be directed to honour the said agreement. However, this is not the case in the present petition. There is neither any agreement nor any undertaking given by respondent No. 4 to the State or for that matters to any authority that it shall be offering part of its transportation business to the members of the petitioner-Society and/or for the said purpose, it shall be engaging the trucks of the members of the petitioner-Society. In this view of the matter, as there is no merit in the present petition, the same is accordingly dismissed, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.