M/S Jagdambay Food Agro Company v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 06.10.2020 M/s Jagdambay Food Agro Company ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN

Present:

Mr. Anurag Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harsimar Singh Sitta, AAG, Punjab.

**** ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL) Heard through video conferencing.

The present Criminal Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of directions to the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and its workers.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is a registered firm which has been allotted the work of labour and cartage for the year 2020-21, vide letter dated 31.08.2020 (Annexure P-1). It is further the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the work allotted to the petitioner is being hampered by the members of the Punjab Pradesh Palledar Union i.e. respondent Nos.5 to 8. The members of the said Union, armed with lethal weapons, are stationed outside the godowns where the labour and cartage work is taking place and are threatening the labour contractor and the labour of dire

-2consequences. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Clause 22 of the Punjab Foodgrains Labour and Cartage Policy 2020-21, which reads as under:

"A. The Deputy Commissioner concerned will appoint Assistant Commissioner (Grievance) as grievance officer to tackle on priority all such complaints from various tenderers which have the potential to create serious law and order situation during procurement season.

BThe Department of Home Affairs, Government of Punjab, will ensure to appoint a senior officer not below the rank of a Superintendent of Police, in each district, to take action on complaint involving law and order situation and to provide adequate arrangement where ever required." Learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that the representations dated 17.09.2020 and 20.09.2020 (Annexures P-3 and P-4) have been submitted to the concerned authorities. However, no action has been taken so far.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that, at this stage, he would be satisfied if a direction is given to the official respondents to look into the matter and take necessary steps to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and the workers so that he would carry on with his work and discharge his contractual obligations. Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Harsimar Singh Sitta, AAG, Punjab has joined the session through video conferencing and accepts notice on behalf of the State. He has no objection if the present petition is disposed off with a direction to the official respondents to look into the matter and take action on the representations dated 17.09.2020

-3- and 20.09.2020 (Annexures P-3 and P-4), in accordance with the law. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without going into the veracity of the averments made in the petition, the present petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No.2 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur, Punjab, to consider the representations dated 17.09.2020 and 20.09.2020 (Annexures P-3 and P-4) and, thereafter, take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO 06.10.2020 Yogesh Sharma