IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.840 OF 2021

Suzlon Global Services Limited ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents

Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. M. H. Kane and Mr. Kedar Patil, Advocates for the Petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Thakre, APP a/w Mr. J. P. Yagnik, APP for the Respondent - State. Mr. Kuldeep Patil i/by Mr. Ranjeet Patil, Advocate for the Applicant/Intervener. Mr. Rahul Kadu, Advocate for Respondent No.3.

Mr. Sharam Singh – Deputy General Manager of the Petitioner - present.

CORAM : S. S. SHINDE & MANISH PITALE, JJ. DATE : 25th MARCH, 2021

P.C.

1. The petitioner company has filed the present writ petition invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court for issuing appropriate directions to the respondent – State and its officials to ensure that smooth and uninterrupted functioning of the petitioner company continues in district Sangli. The petitioner company has installed 232 windmills in district Sangli for generating 269.1 Mega Watts of electricity per hour, which is supplied to the Maharashra State grid through the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that it had engaged the services of respondent No.3 for providing security personnel at its establishment and windmills in district Sangli. As per the agreement between the petitioner and respondent No.3, the said respondent was to bear all the financial liabilities pertaining to the dues of security personnel as per Labour Laws and the Payment of Gratuity Act.

Balaji G. Panchal

Digitally signed by Balaji G. Panchal Date: 2021.03.26 11:02:47 +0530

3. It appears that a serious dispute arose as security personnel engaged for providing security to the establishments and windmills of the petitioner were allegedly not paid their dues towards gratuity. It appears that the security personnel started agitating for the reason that neither respondent No.3 nor the petitioner were allegedly paying their rightful dues towards payment of gratuity. It is the case of the petitioner that the disgruntled security personnel started indulging in violence and damaged windmills and they also caused shutting down of the Central Monitoring System of the petitioner company. These persons indulged in violence to allegedly extort money from the petitioner. It is claimed that by July, 2020, 171 windmills were stopped from working, causing huge loss to the petitioner company.

4. It is also stated in the petition that even though the petitioner company is not liable to pay dues towards gratuity to the security personnel employed by respondent No.3, in view of the serious loss suffered by the petitioner company, it agreed to resolve the issue by involving respondent No.3 and the agitating security personnel. There were rounds of discussions held in the office of the Additional Superintendent of Police, Miraj and thereafter meetings were held in the office of Sub Divisional Officer, Miraj to find a solution.

5. In one such meeting, representatives of the security personnel were directed to file copies of relevant documents in the office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, who could then work out the amount of gratuity payable to the security personnel. On 05.01.2021 a meeting was held with the auditors appointed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner and it was decided in the said meeting, where the representatives of the security personnel were also present, that after requisite documents were submitted the petitioner company would make payment of gratuity in three installments. In this process, the government

auditor submitted a report stating that an amount of Rs.1.24 crores was payable to the security personnel. According to the petitioner company, it does not concede that such an amount is payable, but it is also brought to the notice of this Court that the security personnel were asking for an amount of Rs.6.65 crores, based on imaginary claims. It is in this situation, that the petitioner company filed present writ petition in February, 2021 seeking the aforesaid reliefs. This Court issued notice in the writ petition on 01.03.2021. Learned APP appeared for State and its officials, while an application bearing IA No.1041 of 2021, has been filed by one Amar Vitthal Shinde seeking intervention in the present writ petition claiming to be a labour representative of the aforesaid security personnel.

6. When the matter was called out, Mr. Shirish Gupte, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner company submitted that more than half of windmills established by the petitioner company have come to standstill due to the violence unleashed by the security personnel and that money was sought to be extorted from the petitioner company by the security personnel indulging in such violence. It was claimed that respondent Nos.2 and 4 i.e. Superintendent of Police and Collector of District Sangli had not taken appropriate steps in safeguarding the property of the petitioner company and the life and limb of its employees, due to which the petitioner company was constrained to approach this Court. It was submitted that Rule of law required the said respondents to take appropriate steps and to immediately register FIRs against the persons indulging in such violence. It was submitted that effective steps were required to be taken by the said respondents to ensure that the windmills that had been brought to a standstill could be operated again so as to ensure that the petitioner company did not suffer further loss. It was brought to the notice of this Court that electricity being generated by the petitioner company from the said windmills was supplied to the Maharashtra State grid and that therefore non-

functioning of the windmills was causing loss to the State also.

7. Learned APP submitted that FIRs were registered and appropriate steps were being taken by the respondent – State and its officials. It was further submitted that the windmills were spread over an area of 13 kilometers in district Sangli and that it was not possible for the State to provide security at every place within said area.

8. Mr. Ranjit Patil, learned counsel appearing for the intervener submitted that the petitioner company was avoiding to pay dues that were legitimately payable to the security personnel and that petitioner company was going back on its commitments in that regard.

9. We have considered contentions raised by the rival parties. It appears that some rounds of discussions and deliberations have taken place between petitioner company, respondent No.3 and the security personnel to arrive at a consensus towards payment of amounts due to the security personnel. There can be no doubt about the fact that amounts to which the security personnel are legally entitled ought to be paid to them, but at the same time violence in any form cannot be tolerated and attempt to secure amounts due to the security personnel by destroying property and threatening life and limb of the petitioner company can also not be permitted. Rule of law has to prevail and the respondent – State through its officials must undertake appropriate steps in the matter.

10. Mr. Shirish Gupte, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner company submitted that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner company, it was ready to deposit amount of Rs.80 lakhs within ten days, so that the apprehensions of the security personnel are

addressed. The learned senior counsel states on instructions of Mr. Sharam Singh, Deputy General Manager of the petitioner company, who is present in Court that such amount of Rs.80 lakhs will be deposited on or before 5th April 2021, before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, i.e. the Labour Court, District Sangli. We are of the opinion that the security personnel claiming statutory dues under the said Act need to move appropriate applications before the Controlling Authority, so that all eligible amongst them can receive their dues. Mr. Ranjit Patil, learned counsel appearing for the applicant assures this Court that the applicant will inform the security personnel about the same. We are of the opinion that if such an amount is deposited, it would be a step towards finding a possible solution in the present matter.

11. At the same time, we are of the opinion that the respondent Nos.2 and 4 i.e. Superintendent of Police and District Collector of district Sangli need to take effective steps so that the windmills of the petitioner that have come to a halt because of violence and threat of violence can be restarted and electricity generation is not hampered.

12. Therefore, while keeping the writ petition and intervention application pending, the following directions are given as interim measures :-

• A) The petitioner company, as per its own statement, without prejudice to its rights and contentions shall deposit an amount of Rs.80 lakhs before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, i.e. the Labour Court, District Sangli, on or before 5th April 2021.
• B) The security personnel claiming dues from the petitioner and respondent No.3 under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, shall forthwith move applications for payment of their dues towards gratuity before the said

Controlling Authority. On such applications being moved, the Controlling Authority shall dispose of the same within three months of filing of such applications. The petitioner and respondent No.3 shall cooperate with the Controlling Authority for disposal of such applications within the said time frame.

• C) It is made clear that upon the said amount being deposited before the Controlling Authority, in terms of documents placed on record by the petitioner company itself about admitted amounts due to specific security personnel towards gratuity, the same shall be disbursed by the Controlling Authority from the said amount, upon applications received from such security personnel. The balance amount will remain in deposit before the Controlling Authority, to be utilized for dues payable to security personnel upon consideration and disposal of applications that may be filed by the security personnel in terms of clause 'B' above.
• D) The respondent No.2 Superintendent of Police, District Sangli and respondent No.4 – Collector Sangli shall take immediate steps to provide proper security on the windmills of the petitioner company in district Sangli, as also Central Monitoring System of the petitioner company, in coordination with security guards engaged by the petitioner company, so that electricity generation is not hampered.
• E) The respondent State and its officials shall ensure that law and order is maintained in the district, particularly the area where the petitioner company's windmills are installed, for generation of electricity by taking effective steps and preventing outbreak of violence in any manner.
• F) The respondent No.2 Superintendent of Police shall submit a report to this Court with regard to such effective steps taken in the matter, two days prior to the next date of hearing.

13. List for further consideration on 19th April, 2021, for compliance of direction at 'E' above.

[MANISH PITALE, J] [S. S. SHINDE, J]