Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sunil Kumar And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 March, 2024
CM-4745-CWP-2024 in /and 1 CWP-20569-2021 (O&M) 2024: PHHC:040417 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.101+201-4 CM-4745-C WP-2024 in /and CWP-20569-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.03.2024 Col. Sunil Kumar and others .... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Hemant Bassi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rohit Arya, DAG, Haryana. Mr. A.P.S.Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prateek Rathee, Advocate for private respondents. Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate for respondent no.11/CBI. Ms. Promila Nain, Senior Panel Counsel for the respondent/ED. 3 2k 3 TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)
CM-21169-CWP-2023 This is an application for placing on record the compromise deed, dated 26.05.2022, entered into between petitioners no.2 and 3 and respondent companies, as Annexure R-2.
Application is allowed and the said compromise deed is taken on record as Annexure R-2.
CM-21176-CWP-2023 This is an application for placing on record the compromise deed, dated 31.05.2022, entered into between petitioner no.5 and the respondent companies, as Annexure R-4.
Application is allowed and the said compromise deed is taken MANINDER 2024.03.2317:28 = On record as Annexure R-4. I attest to the accuracy an authenticity of this order/judgment.
CM-4745-CWP-2024 in /and 2 CWP-20569-2021 (O&M) 2024: PHHC:040417 CM-1358-C WP-2024 This is an application for placing on record the Deed of Settlement, dated 16.01.2024, entered into between petitioner no.6 and the respondent company, as Annexure R-5/1, as well as copy of e-mail dated 20.01.2024, as Annexure R-5/2.
Application is allowed. Annexures R-5/1 and R-5/2 are taken on record.
CWP-20569-2021 (O&M) Learned senior counsel contends that compromise deeds settling the issue between the petitioners and respondent companies have been placed on record. Therefore, the matter stands settled, and it already stands dismissed as withdrawn qua petitioners no.1 and 4.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that he has no instructions regarding the Settlement on behalf of petitioners no.2, 3 and 5. None of them has responded despite communication having been sent. He further contends that although he had drafted an application for withdrawal of the writ petition along with affidavit and sent it for signatures to petitioner no. 6, no response has been received from him also.
3. Dismissed for non prosecution.
4. It is made clear that the respondent/Enforcement Directorate shall be at liberty to proceed against the respondent/companies and their directors/authorised persons in accordance with law.
5. Pending miscellaneous application(s) if any, stand disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA) JUDGE 20.03.2024 Maninder MANINDER Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2024.03.23 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and Whether reportable : Yes/ No authenticity of this order/judgment.