Disposed

Uttarakhand Enterprises through Its Representative v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC2 Mar 2022WPMS/371/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, holding a license for river-bed material lifting, approached the High Court for police protection and specific directions to ensure law and order, free movement, and security for its employees against interference at the project site, noting readiness to bear costs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to make a representation to Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar, who must consider it within two weeks.

Uttarakhand Enterprises through Its… — Service and Employment | Uttarakhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

¶2

AT NAINITAL

¶3

ON THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2022

¶4

BEFORE:

¶5

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI

¶6

Writ Petition (M/S) No. 371 of 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Uttarakhand Enterprises,

¶9

through its representative ...Petitioner

¶10

(By Mr. Naman Kamboj, Advocates)

¶11

AND:

¶12

State of Uttarakhand & others. ...Respondent

¶13

(By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Addl. C.S.C. with Mr. N.S. Kanyal, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand)

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

2. Petitioner has been granted license to lift river-bed material from Khasra Nos. 03, 07 & 11 admeasuring 11.657 hectare, to be supplied to M/s Carson Carviyam Construction Gurugram and M/s Pawan Kumar, Shyampur, Haridwar, who have been awarded contract for widening of NH74 by National Highways Authority of India.

¶17

3. According to the petitioner, there are certain persons, who are interfering with the mining work undertaken by the petitioner and they are also creating obstructions in egress and ingress of the officers/employees of the petitioner’s firm.

¶18

¶19

4. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:

¶20

“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to maintain law and order by restraining the respondent no. 5 to 7 including their agents, representatives of other persons from unlawfully entering the project site of petitioner situated at Khasra No. 03, 07 and 11 admeasuring 11.657 Hectares situated at Village Bishanpur, Jarda, Haridwar, Uttarakhand; and

¶21

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents, particularly, respondent no. 3 and 4, to ensure free egress and ingress of the workers, employees and other managerial personnel of petitioner at the project site situated at in Khasra No. 03, 07 and 11 admeasuring 11.657 Hectares situated at Village Bishanpur, Jarda, Haridwar, Uttarakhand; and

¶22

iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to ensure that no persons may create any hindrance in working of the workers, employees & other personnel of the petitioner at the project site situated at Village Bishanpur, Jarda, Haridwar, Uttarakhand and to take the urgent legal action as per law; and

¶23

iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to deploy adequate security at the project site situated at Village Bishanpur, Jarda, Haridwar, Uttarakhand, at the cost of petitioner, to ensure the smooth working at the project site and further to ensure that the mob of persons may not cause any harm to the life & liberty of the employees/workers and other personnel of the petitioner.”

¶24

In sum and substance, petitioner wants police protection for which he is ready to bear the cost of police protection, if provided.

¶25

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met if petitioner is permitted to approach Senior Superintendent of

¶26

¶27

Police, Haridwar by making a representation, who shall examine the matter and take appropriate decision thereupon within some stipulated time.

¶28

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation to Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar. If petitioner approaches Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar within one week from today, by making a representation, the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police shall consider petitioner’s representation and take appropriate decision, as per law, as early as possible, but not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of representation along with certified copy of this order.

¶29

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.)

¶30

Navin

Uttarakhand Enterprises through Its Representative v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uttarakhand Enterprises through Its Representative v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dev Singh Negi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sunil Kumar Vs Secretary Department of Education

Kailash Paliwal Vs Kumaun University Nainital

M/S Anjani Rice Mill Vs the Nainital Bank Limited

Shimla Enclae Welfare Society Sewa Having Its Office Vs Mussorie Dehradun Development Authority Dehradun

Govind Ballabh Awasthi Vs Vinay Kumar Bhargarv