Disposed

Ramanasekar Steels Ltd. v. Inspector of Police

Madras HC24 Aug 2020WP/11443/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by Ramanasekar Steels Limited seeking police protection. The Court directed the respondent to conduct an enquiry on a pending complaint (CSR No.155 of 2020) after issuing notices to counter parties within two weeks of receiving the order.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to conduct enquiry on complaint CSR No.155 of 2020, issue notices to counter parties, and pass orders on merits within two weeks.

Ramanasekar Steels Ltd. Vs Inspector of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.08.2020 CORAM:

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶3

W.P.No.11443 of 2020

¶4

Ramanasekar Steels Limited, represented by its Manager, Mr.Sridhar, Ponneri High Road, Elandhanur, Chennai-600 103. ...Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The Inspector of Police, M6 Manali Police Station, Chennai. ...Respondents

¶7

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under under article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to grant police protection to the petitioner company for removal of the materials belonging to Ashok Leyland and Wheels India Ltd and other companies pursuant to its complaint dated 20.07.2020 in C.S.R.155 of 2020 on the file of the M6 Manali Police Station.

¶8

For Petitioner : M/s.AL.Gandhimathi for M/s.G.Mohana Krishnan

¶9

For Respondents: Mr.S.Karthikeyan Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

This petition has been filed seeking for police protection to the petitioner's company for removal of the material belongs to the Ashok Leyland and Wheels India Ltd and other companies.

¶12

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's company is engaged in the business of manufactures of Iron and Steel, Tin Plating etc.,. The petitioner 's company is being run with around 70 labourers who were exclusively working in the job occupation. Due to Covid-19 pandemic circumstances, the petitioner's company was not able to function with the production and also not able to comply the orders placed upon the petitioner. Therefore, the labourers of the company are preventing the petitioner's company from handing over the material to its various customers. Therefore, he sought for police protection to the petitioner's company.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that on the complaint received from the petitioner, the respondent issued CSR No.155 of 2020 and it is pending for enquiry.

¶15

4.Considering the above submission made by the counsels on record, the respondent is directed to conduct enquiry on the complaint lodged by the petitioner in CSR.No.155 of 2020 after issuing notice to the counter parties and complete the same and pass orders on merits within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶16

5.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is

¶17

disposed of. No costs.

¶18

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mpa
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
M6 Manali Police Station,
Chennai.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
W.P.No.11443 of 2020
A.SK(09/10/2020)

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Ramanasekar Steels Ltd. v. Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanasekar Steels Ltd. v. Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahendhiran Vs Inspector of Police

Ameena Beevi Vs Inspector of Police

Maruthan Vs The Inspector of Police

Arvind Sivakumaran Vs Rajkumar Jain

T.Vasantha Vs State Rep by

Ramesh Vs The Inspector of Police