Disputed facts bar writ relief for reward claims when entitlement and quantum depend on contested factual assertions.

A writ petition seeking payment of a reward amount was held unsuitable for adjudication under Article 226 where entitlement and quantum depended on disputed facts. The claim turned on rival factual assertions about the tax recovered on the basis of the petitioner's information and the amount allegedly payable as reward. The respondents disputed the petitioner's computation, and no rejoinder was filed to controvert those averments. The court noted that writ jurisdiction does not extend to investigation or determination of pure factual controversies, and the petitioner was left to seek relief before the competent civil court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition seeking payment of reward amount was maintainable when the entitlement and quantum of reward depended on disputed facts.

Analysis: The claim rested on rival factual assertions regarding the tax recovered on the basis of the petitioner's information and the amount lawfully payable as reward. The respondents' counter affidavit disputed the petitioner's computation, and the petitioner did not file any rejoinder to controvert those averments. In proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court does not undertake investigation into disputed questions of fact or record findings on pure factual controversies.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable for adjudication of the disputed factual issue and was dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue remedies before the competent civil court.

---