Gujarat High Court
Ashok Anganlal Kedia vs Commissioner Of on 4 February, 2013
Author: Z.K.Saiyed
Bench: Z.K.Saiyed
ASHOK ANGANLAL KEDIA....Petitioner(s)V/SCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE....Respondent(s) C/SCA/2719/2012 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2719 of 2012 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 726 of 2013 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2719 of 2012 ================================================================ ASHOK ANGANLAL KEDIA....Petitioner(s) Versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: PARTY-IN-PERSON for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR ROHAN YAGNIK AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR NV GANDHI for the Respondent No.2. ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED Date : 04/02/2013 ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs :
A. To issue appropriate writ, direction and order to the respondent; directing him as well his subordinate officers to provide necessary police protection to the petitioner to ward off continued nuisance and physical obstruction on the part of the adjoining factory owners; so as to enable the petitioner to carry out necessary repair and reconstruction work of his compound wall of his factory premises and finish the same without any let, hindrance or obstacle from any quarter and maintain law and order situation at the petitioner s factory premises.
B. By way of interim direction, be pleased to direct the respondent and his subordinate officers to station two police constables at the petitioner s factory premises, at the petitioner s cost, initially for a period of one week; so as to enable the petitioner to carry out necessary repair and reconstruction work of his factory wall of his factory premises without any let, hindrance or obstacle from any person.
2. Party-in-person Ronak Kedia, son of petitioner stated that petitioner made representation to PI of Vatva Police Station against nuisance and obstruction created by adjoining factory owners and to provide police protection. He further stated that petitioner made another representation to the respondent Authority for police protection at the petitioner s cost to prevent any untoward incident and maintain law and order.
3. Heard learned AGP Mr. Rohan Yagnik for the respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Gandhi for respondent No.2. They have submitted that the application with regard to police protection is to be entertained in accordance with law and therefore, the petition is not required to be entertained.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Gandhi states that respondent No.2 Jyoti Textile Pvt. Ltd. may be permitted to raise objection before the concerned Authority, if the petitioner makes application for police protection. Request is granted.
5. Both the parties stated that construction is over and the dispute is now resolved.
6. Perused the averments made in the petition along with papers. There is specific provision under the Gujarat Police Act with regard to provide police protection for making application before the Commissioner of Police, so far as Ahmedabad city is concerned and so far other cities are concerned, a person can make application before the concerned District Police Superintendent. Therefore, the petitioner is required to make an application before the concerned Police Authority. The petitioner is permitted to move an application before the concerned Police Authority for providing him police protection and if the petitioner makes application, then the concerned Police Authority shall consider the application after considering the circumstances as stated in the application and after hearing both the parties, within a period of 3 weeks from the receipt of the application in accordance with law, at the costs of the petitioner.
7. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. Notice is discharged.
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.726 of 2013.
In view of the order passed in main matter, the application does not survive. Hence, the application is disposed of. Notice is discharged.
(Z.K.SAIYED, J.) YNVYAS Page 3 of 3