← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/7031/2017

Maa Tarini Industries Limited & ORS v. Pec Limited

2018-08-30Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru2 pages

$~47 & 48 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 7031/2017 MAA TARINI INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr Akhil P.

Chhabra, Ms Ritu Chhabra and Ms Tulika Kamra, Advocates.

versus PEC LIMITED ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Rajesh Kumar Gautam and Mr Aakash Sehrawat, Advocates.

AND + W.P.(C) 7121/2017 TATHAGAT EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr Akhil P.

Chhabra, Ms Ritu Chhabra and Ms Tulika Kamra, Advocates.

versus PEC LIMITED ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Rajesh Kumar Gautam and Mr Aakash Sehrawat, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 07.12.2018 CM No. 51323/2018 in W.P.(C) 7031/2017 CM No. 51321/2018 in W.P.(C) 7121/2017 1.

These are applications filed on behalf of the petitioners, inter alia, praying that the blacklisting order passed against them be removed from the

website of the respondent (PEC Ltd.). They further pray that it be ensured that the same does not appear in the Google search engine. In addition, the petitioner have also prayed that respondent be directed to circulate the order dated 30.08.2018 to various departments who had been informed about the order of blacklisting.

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not press the prayer as far as the removal of the information regarding blacklisting as appearing on Google search engine is concerned. He also does not press his prayer as far as circulating the order dated 30.08.2018 is concerned since, it was clarified at the time of hearing that the respondent had already circulated an order informing all concerned agencies that blacklisting order had been stayed by this Court.

3.

Insofar as the petitioner's prayer regarding removal of the blacklisting from the respondent's website is concerned, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the same has already been done. However, it does appear from the screenshots as annexed with the CM No.51321/2018 in W.P.(C) No.7121/2017 that the said order is still reflected on the respondent's website. In this view, the respondent is directed to forthwith remove the same from its website, if not already done. 4.

No further orders are required to be passed in these applications. The same are disposed of.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J DECEMBER 07, 2018 MK