ITC Limited vs State of M.P. & Ors.

The instant PIL is filed for seeking the following reliefs:-

"VERNACULAR MATTER OMITTED"

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

The grievance raised by the petitioner primarily is disturbance caused to the peace and tranquility of the area on Rohit Jagwani v. Union of India and Ors.

account of unruly behavior of candidates who had come to participate in the recruitment conducted for induction into army in November, 2014 which caused considerable damage to the public property and embarrassment to citizens.

The respondents ie. Union of India and the State have filed their return reflecting that they have taken adequate steps to ensure prevention/reccurence of such instances in the future.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought on record certain subsequent events to indicate that even in 2015 similar instances of unruly behavior and loss to public property took place arising out of similar recruitment drive conducted by the army.

After hearing learned counsel for the rival parties, this court is of the considered view that there may be certain instances of discriminatory treatment on the part of the State authorities in taking action against the candidates indulging in the said unruly behavior but the reality of the situation cannot be ignored that where thousands of anxious candidates accumulate at a single place the possibility cannot be ruled out that the smallest of disputes, oral or physical, may erupt into a riot. No doubt that the State authorities ought to have foreseen such an extreme contingency to arise which probably was not done by the State authorities and therefore the unfortunate incident occurred.

The problem besides being of breach of law and order also concerns the lack of foresight and wisdom on the part of the State authorities to be ready to deal with the worst consequence that may entail.

7.1 This court is conscious of the fact that the State functionaries are handicapped on account of lack of infrastructure, inadequate manpower and other related disabilities but that by itself does not absolve the State functionaries of their duty to Rohit Jagwani v. Union of India and Ors.

maintain law and order by taking preventive steps to deal with the worst scenario that can occur so as to minimize the need to take curative/remedial measures.

7.2. The Union of India should also contemplate as to whether the process of recruitment conducted by them at one single venue compelling hundreds and thousands of candidates to congregate at one place needs to be changed to a more practical and effective strategy by holding recruitment at different places on different dates where for obvious reasons the number of candidates would be less and manageable thereby rendering it easier for State functionaries to deal with the law and order situation.

Accordingly, this court disposes of this petition with the following directions:

The Union of India and it''s functionaries are directed to reconsider their policy of holding recruitment for induction into the army at one particular venue and instead may hold the same at different venues on different dates or any other effective mode with the ultimate object of preventing reccurence of untoward incident and take a decision in that regard as expeditiously as possible.

The State and it''s functionaries are further directed to make preparations for maintaining law and order at the venue of army recruitment drive as and when it is held in the future by mobilising enough infrastructure and manpower to prevent any untoward incident in the future.

The State authorities should not hesitate to take suitable penal action against all candidates, who take Rohit Jagwani v. Union of India and Ors.

law in their hands, without adopting any discrimination or pick and choose policy. No cost.

Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs at Bhopal for compliance and to the Secretary of Defense, South Block, New Delhi.