HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CRM No.M-27567 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.09.2011 **** M/s. Venus Transport Co. . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Avnish Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner **** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). Notice to AG Punjab. On the asking, Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, learned DAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. (2). The petitioner is a transport contractor to whom work was allotted by the Food Corporation of India. The petitioner approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in CWP No.13226 of 2010 alleging that the local truck union and its office-bearers were obstructing the plying of trucks of the petitioner-company. Notwithstanding the fact that this Court vide order 28.7.2010 granted interim protection, the petitioner withdrew the said writ petition on 13.9.2010 on the basis of some amicable settlement arrived at between the parties. CRM No.M-27567 of 2011.doc - 2 – (3). This petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has now been filed alleging that from last 7-8 months, the seventh respondent – the truck union has again started indulging in unlawful activities to obstruct the plying of trucks by the petitioner-company. A direction is accordingly sought to the local police for the protection of life and liberty of its employees and/or the partners of the petitioner-firm. (4). Having heard learned counsel for the parties and without going into the allegations at this stage, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga and the SHO Police Station, Dharamkot District Moga to look into the complaints made by the petitioner-Company against the office-bearers of the truck union (respondent No.7) and take appropriate action in accordance with law. (5). The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (6). Dasti by tomorrow on payment of usual charges. 12.09.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge