M/S. High Command vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi
2015 Latest Caselaw 3673 Del

$~1
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 2936/2015
      M/S. HIGH COMMAND                           ..... Petitioner
                    Through: Mr. Gaurav Puri, Ms. Nupur Goswami,
                    Mr.Aashish Gumber and Mr. Varun Bharadwaj,
                    Advocates

                          versus

      GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI                       ..... Respondent
                     Through: Mr. Raman Duggal, Standing Counsel,
                     GNCTD
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
               ORDER

% 06.05.2015

1. This is a writ petition whereby, a writ of mandamus is sought of the nature that a direction be issued to the respondent to comply with the Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 (in short 2005 Act) and the rules framed thereunder, and furthermore, in line with the provisions of the said Act and Rues, grant a license to the petitioner, for running a security agency.

2. The petitioner claims that he has been in the business of private security agency since, 30.03.2011.

2.1 The petitioner also avers that, he had applied for a license to undertake the business of the private security agency under the 2005 Act, on 30.03.2011.

2.2 In respect of the application filed, it is the petitioner's case that an acknowledgement was received by the petitioner on 18.04.2011.

W.P.(C) 2936/2015                                          page 1 of 2
 2.3      The petitioner, is aggrieved by the fact that two years later, a show

cause notice dated 18.07.2013 was issued, which indicated that license could not be granted as a case under Section 304 A of the IPC, was pending against him, in PS Palam Village. The show cause notice also adverted to the fact that a trial was pending in court qua the said case. 2.4 The petitioner avers that a reply to the said show cause notice was filed on 01.08.2013. In the reply, the petitioner, indicated that he could be denied a license, only if, he were to be convicted for an offence, and accorded punishment of two years or more. For this purpose, there is a reference in the reply to the provisions of Section 6(B) of the 2005 Act.

3. According to the petitioner, there has been no adjudication of the aforementioned show cause notice.

4. Mr. Duggal, who appears on advance notice, says that the best way forward would be, to direct the authority concerned to adjudicate upon the said show cause notice.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to adjudicate upon the show cause notice dated 18.07.2013, with due expedition. The needful will be done no later than eight weeks from today.

6. Needless to say, the adjudicating authority will pass a speaking order, and a copy of the same will be supplied to the petitioner. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, he will have liberty to take recourse to an appropriate remedy, albeit in accordance with law.

                                               RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
MAY 06, 2015/yg
W.P.(C) 2936/2015                                               page 2 of 2