[2025:RJ-JP:18633-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12661/2020 1. Daulat Singh S/o Jitendra Pal Singh, Aged About 42 Years, Resident of Kanjoli Line, Bharatpur (Raj.). 2. Kripal Singh S/o Girraj Singh, Aged About 68 Years, Resident of 13, Near Cimmco Factory, Nagla Tejsingh Bharatpur (Raj.). 3. Ashok Kumar Jain S/o Fateh Chand Jain, Aged About 68 Years, Resident of Gopalgarh, Near Jain Mandir, Bharatpur (Raj). 4. Rajharan Singh S/o Not Known, Aged About 46 Years, Resident of Ward No.45, RIICO Marg, Cimmco Labour Colony, Bharatpur (Raj.). 5. Vinod Kumar Yadav S/o Manan Choudhary, Aged About 35 Years, Resident of Cimmco Labour Colony, Bharatpur (Raj.). 6. Rohit Kumar S/o Ramveer Singh, Aged About 24 Years, Resident of Cimmco Labour Colony, Bharatpur (Raj.). ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Industries Department, Government of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. Secretary, Labour And Welfare Department, Government of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Dy. Labour Commissioner, Labour Department, Government of Rajasthan, Bharatpur (Raj.). 4. Central India Machinery Manufacturing Company Ltd., (Cimmco Ltd.) Registered Office, Premlata 4th Floor, 39 Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-700017 (WB) Through Authorized Signatory. 5. Titagarh Wagons Ltd., Company Registered Office, Titagarh Tower, 756, Anandpur, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata- 700107 (W.B.) Through Authorized Signatory. 6. District Collector, Bharatpur (Raj.). 7. Secretary, Department of Corporate Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi. ----Respondents [2025:RJ-JP:18633-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-12661/2020] For Petitioner(s) : None Pesent For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Adhiraj Modi, Adv. Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG assisted by Ms. Manaswita Nakwal, Adv. Mr. Peush Nag, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 02/05/2025 This writ petition labeled as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed with a host of prayers such as: “(i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction your lordships may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to implement the compromise/settlement dated 5.3.2008 in its true spirit and manner and also give benefits of the retired employees and to give employment to the persons named in the compromise/settlement. (ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction your lordships may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents not to demolish the construction which has been made for the welfare of the Labours like quarters, school building, play grounds and other assets of the company. (iii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction your lordships may kindly be directed the respondents not to allow free hold land of 470 Bighas and comply with the conditions of lease deed dated 24.08.1966. (iv) by an appropriate writ, order or direction your lordships may kindly restrained the respondents taking loan from Banks/Financial Institutions by pledging the property of CIMMCO Ltd. (v) by an appropriate writ, order or direction your lordships may kindly be pleased to further direct the respondents to allot the extra land lying unutilized since beginning of Cimmco till now, for the new industrialist who are in the need of land for developing their business in District Bharatpur through Government agencies like RIICO etc. (vi) by an appropriate writ, order or direction your lordships may kindly be pleased to restrained the respondent company to work outside the District Bharatpur for the work orders taken in the name of CIMMCO Bharatpur and issue direction to the Secretary Company Law Board not allowed [2025:RJ-JP:18633-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-12661/2020] merger of Cimmco Ltd. With Titagarh Wagons Ltd. Kolkatta. (vii) Any other order or direction as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in favour of the humble petitioner be also passed.” 2. This is a well settled proposition in law that different causes of action which would require determination on different set of facts cannot be clubbed together in one petition. Secondly, the prayer seeking implementation of compromise/settlement dated 05th March 2008 shall be in the nature of a prayer seeking specific performance of the agreement. For that, the writ petition shall not be maintainable besides that no one appears for the petitioners. 3. On a previous occasion, that is, on 23rd September 2022 this writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. 4. On 23rd September 2022, this Court passed the following order: “None is present for the petitioners. On earlier occasions also i.e. on 04.08.2022 and 20.09.2022, none was present on behalf of the petitioners. This civil writ petition (PIL) is dismissed for want of prosecution.” 5. In view of the above, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12661/2020 is dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J AMIT/264