AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Basant, J.—The Petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to Respondents 2 and 3 to afford police protection to the Petitioner for undertaking the activity, which he is permitted to do under Ext. P2 licence granted to him, against any illegal obstruction that is raised by the 4th Respondent.
According to the Petitioner, he is legally entitled to carry out the activity which he is permitted under Ext. P2. The 4th Respondent has absolutely no valid justification to raise any obstruction. The Petitioner has not been able to undertake the work in view of the illegal obstruction by the 4th Respondent. The 4th Respondent is said to be an influential political functionary and at his instance obstructions are being raised against the legal activity undertaken by the Petitioner, complains the Petitioner.
Respondent No. 4 is served. There is no appearance for him. For Respondents 1 to 3, the learned Government Pleader appears. The learned Government Pleader submits that Respondents 1 to 3 are satisfied that the Petitioner has the legal right to carry out the work as per Ext. P2 and that the 4th Respondent has no right to obstruct such activity. The Petitioner has complained of such obstruction by the 4th Respondent. The learned Government Pleader points out that under Ext. P2, permission granted extends only till 04.06.2011.
The learned Counsel for the Petitioner promptly submits that subsequently Ext. P3 application has been filed for extension of time and if not, the Petitioner can file a further application for extension of time. It is undertaken that the Petitioner shall carry out the activity only as permitted under Ext. P2 and within such time limit as is extended and granted by the 1st Respondent.
We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that the Petitioner can be granted police protection. In the absence of any objection from the 4th Respondent and in the light of the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, we are satisfied that the Petitioner is entitled for such protection.
In the result:
a) This Writ Petition is allowed;
b) Respondents 2 and 3 are directed to afford protection to the Petitioner to carry out the work as permitted under Ext. P2 within such extended time as is granted to the Petitioner to undertake such work by the 1st Respondent against illegal obstruction if any raised by the 4th Respondent and persons acting under him;
c) Needless to say, work will have to be undertaken by the Petitioner strictly in accordance with Ext. P2 and subject to securing necessary orders from the 1st Respondent to extend the period of time stipulated in Ext. P2.