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dismissed as withdrawn qua petitioners no.1 and 4.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.
