Chakra Infrastructure Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15405 of 2013 ======================================================
1. Chakra Infrastructure Ltd., A Company Registered Under The Company Act, 1956 Having Its Head Office At Chakra Madhumati, 28, Purbachal Main Road, Kolkata West Bengal Through Santosh Kumar Son Of Mr. Raj Ballam Singh, Resident Of Kaushal Nagar, P.S. Hawai Adda, District Patna .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna
2. The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna
3. Director General Of Police, Patna
4. Senior Superintendent Of Police, Patna
5. Additional Superintendent Of Police, Barh, District Patna
6. Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Barh District Patna
7. Officer Incharge, Barh Police Station District Patna
8. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Agriculture Department Of Agriculture And Cooperation, Government Of India, New Delhi
9. Joint Secretary To The Government, Department Of Agriculture And Cooperation, New Delhi
10. Central Registrar Of Cooperative Society, Government Of India, New Delhi
11. Secretary, Department Of Corporate Affairs, Government Of India, New Delhi
12. Registrar, Companies, West Bengal
13. Reserve Bank Of India Through The Governor, Reserve Bank Of India
14. Security Of Exchange Board Of India (Sebi), Through Its Chairman, Government Of India, New Delhi .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dudh Nath Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prahlad Kr. Bhagat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 29-03-2016 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur for the petitioner and A.C. to G.P.-13 for the State.
Two reliefs were prayed for. The first relief is for direction upon the respondents to open the lock of the Branch Office of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.15405 of 2013 (3) dt.29-03-2016 2/2 petitioner situated in Barh. The second relief pertains to a direction upon the respondents not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioner company in the State of Bihar save and except as provided in law.
Mr. Thakur states the first relief has become infructuous. There can be no dispute on the second relief. Any action of the State has to be in accordance with law. In the backdrop of attending facts which obtained during the pendency of the application, Mr. Thakur has submitted that observing the aforesaid, the matter can be disposed of.
I accordingly dispose of the writ application recording that any interference with the day to day functioning of the petitioner company at the hands of the respondents or any statutory authority shall only be in accordance with law.
(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U