Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/2627/2021 on 16 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
ON THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE:
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2627 of 2021
BETWEEN:
M/S HCC- DBL- JV (through
its Authorized Representative) ...Petitioner
(By Mr. Sahil Mullick, Advocate)
AND:
State of Uttarakhand and others ...Respondents
(By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State
and Mr. Yogesh Kumar Pacholia, Advocate for respondent nos. 7, 9, 10
and 12 )
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a construction company
which has been awarded contract of laying Railway
Track from Rishikesh to Karanprayag. Petitioner is
apprehending breach of peace at the hands of
workers engaged by him and also the Trade Union.
2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner
has sought the following reliefs:-
"(a) Issue a writ in the form of Mandamus, directing
the respondent nos. 22, 23 and 24, to ensure
that Union is forthwith estopped from holding
all forms of protest/ violent activity/
pressurizing the petitioners employees to join
the Union, and all such activities as
enumerated in the present writ petition, which
is interfering with the execution of the Project,
the ingress and egress of the raw materials,
into the precincts of the project site and the
safety and security of the petitioner company
officials and the innocent employees/
workmen, employed at the site;
(b) Issue a writ in the form of Mandamus, ordering
and directing respondent no. 22, 23 and 24 to
immediately take a strict action against the
representatives of the Union and its members
(respondent nos. 3 to 21) for inciting violence,
holding unlawful assemblies and also against
all persons engaged in the following unlawful
activities:
(i) of threatening and restraining the current
employees in performing and/or carrying
of the said project work.
(ii) Of creating, various disturbances for the
employees of the petitioner and
hindrance in execution of the project
(iii) Of using foul language and passing abusive
remarks at the gate of the site camps.
(iv) Of interfering with the ingress and egress
of the raw material at the Project sites
(v) Of intimidating the managing authorities of
the Project.
(vi) Of putting pressure on the petitioner's
contract employees to get enrolled as
members of the Union
(c) Issue a writ in the form of Mandamus, ordering
and directing respondent no. 22, 23 and 24 to
ensure complete compliance of Section 144
order, and to ensure smooth continuation of
activities related to the captioned public
project;"
3. After arguing for a while, learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner
has made a representation to the District
Magistrate, Rudraprayag, which is Annexure No. 5
to the writ petition. He then confined his prayer
and submitted that District Magistrate be directed
to consider petitioner's representation and take
appropriate decision in the matter.
4. Having regard to the facts and
circumstance of the case, the writ petition is
disposed of with direction to the District
Magistrate, Rudraprayag to consider and decide
petitioner's representation, as early as possible
preferably within three weeks, from date of
production of representation with certified copy of
this order, in accordance with law.
5. It is made clear that before taking any
decision, District Magistrate shall also hear the
representatives of the Trade Union/Workers.
6. Let a certified copy of this order be
issued to the parties within 24 hours.
(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.)
Shubham
