High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/26183/2016disposed of

Kamaljit Singh Chawla v. State Of Punjab & ORS.

2016-12-17Mr. Justice T.H.B. Chalapathi2 pages

Civil Writ Petition No.26183 of 2016 ...1...

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.26183 of 2016 Date of Decision: December 17, 2016 Kamaljit Singh Chawla

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab & Ors.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK

Present:

Mr.Manhar S.Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J.(Oral) Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, petitioner has approached this Court, by way of present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, fairly states that one gunman has already been provided to the petitioner but in view of the threat perception, petitioner deserves to be provided more security. He further submits that petitioner will be satisfied incase respondent No.3 is directed to look into self-contained representation dated 11.6.2015 (Annexure P-30) moved by the petitioner by passing an appropriate order thereon, within a reasonable time.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, Additional Director General of Police (Security), Punjab-respondent No.3, is directed to look into the matter, consider the grievance and threat perception raised in the Seema Sharma 2016.12.17 16:30 I attest the accuracy and authencity of the document

Civil Writ Petition No.26183 of 2016 ...2...

representation (Annexure P-30) and decide the same at an early date by passing an appropriate order thereon, strictly in accordance with law but in any case within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

However, it is made clear that since the petitioner is seeking additional security, he shall bear the expenses, if any additional security is found required to be provided to the petitioner, after giving due consideration to his threat perception by respondent No.3. With the abovesaid observations made and directions issued, instant writ petition stands disposed of.

December 17, 2016 (RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) seema JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Seema Sharma 2016.12.17 16:30 I attest the accuracy and authencity of the document