Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/301/2023 on 1 February, 2023
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
01.02.2023
WPMS No. 301 of 2023
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate, for
the petitioner.
Mr. Yogesh Tiwari, Brief Holder, for
the State.
Mr. Rajendra Arya, Advocate,
holding brief of Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate,
for the respondent(s).
The petitioner had outsourced the
security services, by the manpower which
herein, owing to the fact that the manpower
which was supplied by respondent No. 7,
they were not physically fit to render nature
of security services, the THDC decided to
undertake to their physical examination in
order to ensure, as to whether they are
suitable for the purposes for which they
have been deployed.
On the invitation of security
personnel to undergo, that particular test
there was an agitation raised by them which
has created an apprehension and threat to
the installation of the petitioner
establishment, as well as their official
premises and the residential quarters.
Hence, the petitioners have prayed for in
the writ petition to provide an immediate
police protection to the corporate
headquarters as well as the other colonies
which has been referred to in the prayer of
the present writ petition.
The learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the issue would
stand covered by the judgment dated
03.05.2017, as rendered by the coordinate
Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (M/S)
No. 1005 of 2017, Alaknanda Hydro Power
Company Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State of
Uttarakhand, through Secretary, Home,
Secretariat.
The direction which was issued by
the coordinate Bench of this Court which is
extracted hereunder:-
"Respondent nos. 1 to 9 are hereby directed to
maintain law and order in and around the project of
petitioners, and shall also ensure free ingress and egress to
all valid entrants. Obstructions, if any, coming in the way of
smooth and peaceful functioning of Hydro Power Project to
petitioners shall also be removed at the petitioners' cost.
Necessary protection shall be given to the workers, officers
and their families who are living inside the campus at the
petitioners' cost. It is however, clarified that the above
directions will not preclude agitators from carrying on any
peaceful and lawful dhamma or agitation without causing
and hindrance in the functioning of petitioner Power Project
from a distance of 200 meters or more. No peaceful
agitation to pursue one's demand shall be suppressed."
This Court has been informed that a
Special Appeal was preferred by one Ms.
of 2018, Sunita Pandey and Another Vs.
Alaknanda Hydro Power Company Ltd and
others. The said Special Appeal too has been
later on dismissed for want of prosecution
by the Division Bench, vide its judgment
dated 31.10.2018 and there is nothing on
record, as such even of the records of
Special Appeal, which was summoned by
this Court, that as against the judgment of
the Division Bench affirming the judgment
of the learned Single Judge any further
proceeding was carried before the Hon'ble
Apex Court.
In that eventuality, the directions
issued by the coordinate Bench of this Court
vide its judgment dated 23.05.2017 would
have attained finality.
In that view of the matter, this writ
petition too would stand disposed of in the
light of the directions which have been
issued and extracted hereinabove, directing
the respondents herein except for
respondent No. 7, to provide the protection
to the petitioner as it has been
contemplated by the judgment dated
03.05.2017.
Subject to the aforesaid, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
Vacation Judge
01.02.2023
Mahinder/
