As per case facts, the petitioner challenged a notice from the respondents to commence work within 48 hours, failing which the contract would be rescinded and security forfeited. The petitioner, ... having secured a construction contract, argued that work could not start due to various impediments like environmental clearances, utility line removals, and encroachments, for which the respondents had not provided an encumbrance-free site or necessary drawings despite multiple requests. The respondents, however, issued the notice without addressing these concerns, contending that the matter involved disputed facts unsuitable for a writ petition and that the contract provided for arbitration. The question arose whether a writ petition is maintainable for contractual disputes involving disputed facts when the contract specifies a dispute resolution mechanism like a Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) and arbitration. Finally, the Court found that the parties raised disputed questions of facts and the contract provided a specific dispute settlement mechanism. The writ petition was disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all disputes to respondent no. 4 within a week. If respondent no. 4 fails to settle or if no DAB is constituted, the matter must be referred to arbitration, and an interim order shall continue until the dispute is decided.