2026:UHC:480-DB SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PCRL/ 3 4 9 / 2 0 2 4 Hon ’ble Man oj Kum ar Tiw ar i, J. Hon ’ble Siddhar t ha Sah , J. Mr. Amanjot Singh Chaddha, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. 2. Mr. K.S. Bora, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. J.P. Kandpal, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Mr. Nikhil Singhal, Advocate for respondent no. 7. 4. Petitioners have filed this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs: - “1. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of the Mandamus, directing and comm anding the respondent public authorities to ensure the protection of the life and liberty of the petitioners, their staffs & management as well as also provide protection to the property (Raja biscuit factory situated at Plot No.5 to 15 in SIDCUL Haridwar) of the petitioners as guaranteed by the Constitution of India. 2. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of the Mandamus, directing and commanding the respondent public authorities to provide adequate security to the petitioners from the life threats given by the private respondent no.7 and restrain him and his associates including local police without any search warrant from interfering in the factory premises situated at plot no.5 to 15 in SIDCUL Haridwar. 3. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of the Mandamus, directing and commanding the respondent public authorities to provide a gunners to the management and other staff of the petitioners to protect their life and liberty and the property i.e. factory at Haridwar.” 5. Pleadings made in the writ petition indicates that petitioners were apprehending threat to their life and liberty. 2026:UHC:480-DB 6. Mr. Amanjot Singh Chaddha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. Nikhil Singhal, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 7 submit that parties have now entered into a settlement. 7. Mr. Amanjot Singh Chaddha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners do not survive anymore. 7. In view of the averments made in Miscellaneous Application (IA No. 4 of 2026) and compromise deed, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. The compromise deed entered into between petitioner and respondent no. 7, which is enclosed with the Miscellaneous Application (IA No. 4 of 2026), shall form part of the order. ( Siddh ar t ha Sah, .J.) ( Man oj Kum ar Tiw ar i, .J.) 10.01.2026 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131 bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D6 53D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.01.10 16:23:05 +05'30'