Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Food Corporation Of India Workers Union vs Food Corporation Of Inda And Others on 15 December, 2011

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

CWP No.20723 of 2011                                 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

                                                 CWP No.20723 of 2011
                                     Date of decision December 15, 2011



Food Corporation of India Workers Union, Sangrur

                                                     ....... Petitioner
                             Versus

Food Corporation of Inda and others
                                                     ........Respondents



CORAM:           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

Present:-        Mr. G. N. Malik, Advocate
                 for the petitioner.

                 Mr. H. S. Dhandi, Advocate
                 for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

                 Mr. Navdeep Sukhna, DAG., Punjab.

                 Mr. Brijesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate
                 for respondent No.5.

                       ****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?No

2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?No K. Kannan, J (oral).

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would be satisfied if the legal notice (Annexures P-1 and P-4) which has been addressed to respondent Nos.3 and 4 is considered and appropriate decision be taken on the issue of security to be given to the petitioner.

2. As ordered.

3. The respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall consider the legal notice (Annexure P-1 and P-4) and provide for personal security as the situation may warrant. The decision shall be taken within a period of CWP No.20723 of 2011 2 three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. While taking such a decision, the fifth respondent-worker will also be heard.

4. The writ petition is disposed of.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE December 15 , 2011 archana