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 115]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

M/S Ultratech Cement Ltd vs State Of H.P. And Ors on 8 August, 2018

Bench: Sanjay Karol, Sandeep Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 1424 of 2018 Date of Decision: 08.8.2018 ____ M/s Ultratech Cement Ltd. .....Petitioner.

Versus .

State of H.P. and Ors. ...Respondents.

Coram:

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. B.C. Negi, Senior Advocate with Mr. P.P. Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Ms. Ritta Goswami and Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Additional Advocate Generals, for the State.
                           r              Mr.    Amrinder     Rana,     Advocate,   for
                                          respondent No.7.

Mr. H.S. Rana, Advocate, for respondents No. 8 to 15.

__________________________________________________________________ Sanjay Karol, ACJ. (oral) Petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs:-

" a) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to 6 to immediately to take all effective steps in prohibiting/stopping respondent No. 7 to 15 as well as other persons working under their influence from carrying out illegal activities in the form of arson, gate meeting, abuses, violence, unauthorized restraint, stoppage of work and preventing workers from performing their duties within 500 mtrs. of the cement plant, office and the residential area of the petitioner company.
b) That this Hon'ble Court may further be please to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 1 to 6 to provide adequate security cover at the office and the cement plant and the residential area of the petitioner company to safeguard the life and property of the officers and workers of the petitioner company and to ensure that respondent No. 7 to 15 and other villagers working under their influence are not able to cause any harm to life and property of the officers and workers of the petitioner company as well as that of the petitioner company and to ensure the working and peaceful atmosphere at cement plant is maintained and workers and the management staff 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 09/08/2018 23:01:20 :::HCHP

...2...

who are working are able to perform their duties without any threat."

.

2. On 27.6.2018, this Court passed the following interim order:-

"CWP No. 1424/2018 & CMP No. 5818/2018.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner states that the subject matter and cause of action of the Civil suit pending before the Civil Court is totally different and distinct than that of the present petition. Some of the persons blocking ingress and egress of the premises, as depicted in the photographs at pages 61 to 64 are not respondents before the Trial Court. Also, the demonstration, which is illegal, is carried out subsequent to the passing of the interim order by the Trial Court. As such cause of action is totally different and distinct.
Issue notice. Mr. Ranjan Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, waives notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 6. Dasti notices be issued to respondents Nos. 7 to 15, returnable for 25th July, 2018, on taking steps within three days. List on 25th July, 2018.
In the meanwhile, we direct the Superintendent of Police Baddi, BBN & DA, Solan, HP (respondent No.4) to ensure that no person is allowed to obstruct the ingress and egress to the premises of the petitioner company and gate meetings, if any, be held outside the radius of 500 meters of the premises of the petitioner company. Dasti copy."

3. Learned counsel for the parties agreed that the petition may be disposed of making such interim order to be absolute. Ordered accordingly. However, it stands clarified that it shall be open for the private respondents to agitate their grievances in accordance with law. Accordingly, present petition stands disposed of, so also pending applications, if any.



                                                  ( Sanjay Karol),
                                                 Acting Chief Justice


    8th August, 2018                            ( Sandeep Sharma ),
    (Manjit/brb)                                       Judge.




                                                    ::: Downloaded on - 09/08/2018 23:01:20 :::HCHP