Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 1316 (PAT)

Warisafiganj Chini Mill Swabiambi Udyogic Sahkari Samiti Ltd. v. State Of Bihar

2000-12-13

AFTAB ALAM, RAVI S.DHAVAN

body2000
Judgment 1. This petition by Warisaliganj Chini Mill, an organisation calling itself as Chini Mill Swabiambi Udyogic Sahkari Samiti Limited, Warisaliganj, Nawada, has been filed basically to seek reliefs by a writ of mandamus for directions to be issued to the State of Bihar, the Chief Minister, the Chief Secretary, the Managing Director, Bihar State Sugar Corporation Limited, Secretary, department of Cane, Government of Bihar, Commissioner, Sugarcane, Bihar, Industrial Development Commissioner, Bihar, Bihar State Sugar Corporative Limited, General Manager, Bihar State Sugar Corporation Limited and Registrar, self sufficient Co-operative Society, Bihar that the Sugar factory, Warisaliganj, lying closed be restarted. 2. The petitioner narrates parleys which the political leaders have had with the Chief Minister of Bihar along with other Ministers of the Cabinet. Despite the assurance given, the petitioner contends, the sugar factory has not been restarted. 3. The writ which the petitioner seeks from the High Court cannot be granted on a public interest litigation. The High Court would not know the cause which brought the sugar factory to a grinding halt. If the industry is sick then the petitioner may approach the Board of Industrial And Financial Reconstruction Regulations under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 or if the workers have been illegally retrenched or If there has been an illegal closure (as submissions have been rendered) then the remedies lie in an industrial adjudication. 4. There is too much to be inquired and the Court cannot take the contention of the petitioner on its face value and give direction that the sugar factory be started. If it were that easy then the High Court would be running the industries in the State. This is not the function of the High Court. 5. This was an ill-advised Public Interest Litigation. Dismissed.