1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT

DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2013

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA

W.P.NOS.24150-24164/2013 (GM-POLICE) C/W. W.P.NOS.24340-24344/2013 (GM-POLICE)

IN W.P.NOS.24150-24164/2013

BETWEEN:

1. M/S.AKANSHA ENTERPRISES, NO.44/1, K.H. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR. M.S. JAYARAM,

2. M/S. CHEF-INN REGENCY, PREMIER BAR & RESTAURANT, NO.4, RING ROAD, , BANGALORE-560 071, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR. C. RAMESH.

3. M/S. CHEF-INN DELUXE, 1-18, ACHIAH SHETTY LAYOUT, RMV EXTENSION, MEKRI CIRLCE, BANGALORE-560 080, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPREITOR, MR. C. RAMESH.

4. M/S. SAI LEELA LINK (NARTHAKI), 43/44, CHANDRA PRABHA COMPLEX, RESIDENCY ROAD,

2

BANGALORE-560 025, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR. M. JAVEARAYI GOWDA.

5. M/S. M4U BAR & RESTAURANT, 131, 1 ST FLOOR, OPP. VELLARA JUNCTION, , BANGALORE-560 025, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR. PRAKASH.

6. M/S. SANNIDHI ENTERPRISES (DAWATH) BAR & RESTAURANT, 340, MARUTHI PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR, 1 ST ‘B’ MAIN, 7TH BLOCK, , BANGALORE-560 034, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR. DINESH B.SHETTY.

7. M/S. BRIGADE DREAMS BAR & RESTAURANT, 140, BRIGADE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 021, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI.ARJUN KUMAR P.V.

8. M/S. KUBER GROUP OF HOTELS, 897/B, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 095, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR. K.N. NAGARAJ.

3

9. M/S. VKL HOSPITALITY, VKL RESORTS PVT. LTD., 120-125, KH ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027, REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO, MR.G.VIKRAM RAJAN.

10. M/S. NIGHT CITY (ASHOKA), 37, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 095, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI.ASHOKA RAI.

11. M/A. AISHWARYA FAMILY RESTAURANT, 23/24, 3 RD MAIN, OPP. KAMATH YATRI NIVAS, GANDHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 009, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPREITOR, MR. P.S. MOHAN KUMAR.

12. M/S. NANDI HOTELS, 96, INTERMEDIATE RING ROAD, AMAR JYOTI LAYOUT, DOMLUR RING ROAD, BANGALORE-560 071, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR. SUDHAKAR SHETTY.

13. M/S. BRIGADE GARDENS, 48, BRIGADE ROAD, BANGALORE- 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR. Y.R. MANOHAR.

4

14. M/S. SHASHWATHI ENTERPRISES (PORT OF PAVILION), 1/3, SUJATHA COMPLEX, 1ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 009, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR.MOHAN M.SHETTY.

15. M/S. SAMRUDHI ENTERPRISES (SANGEETH), SANGEETHA BAR & RESTAURANT, 186/10, VEENA MANSION, S.C. ROAD, OPP: NATRAJA THEATER, , BANGALORE-560 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR.ASHOK HEGDE. ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI.SUBRAMANYA.R)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, , AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 1. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (CENTRAL), KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

5

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (SOUTH-EAST), KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (WEST), KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

6. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (ULSSOR GATE), KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

7. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SESHADRIPURAM SUB DIVISION, BANGALORE-560 020.

8. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, , BANGALORE-560 053.

9. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, , BANGALORE-560 068.

10. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, HAL, BANGALORE-560 018.

11. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE-560 017.

12. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034.

6

13. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ASHOKNAGAR, BAGNALORE-560 025.

14. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, S.R.NAGARA, BANGALORE-560 065.

15. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, , BANGALORE-560 028.

16. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE-560 020.

17. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, , BANGALORE-560 080.

18. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, UPPARPETE, BANGALORE-560 053. ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.RAVIVARMA KUMAR A.G, SRI.JAGADISH MUNDARGI, G.A & SRI.VIJAYAKUMAR A.PATIL, HCGP)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES FROM INTEFERING WITH THE CONDUCTING OF BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY THE PETITIONERS IN TERMS OF THE LICENSE ISSUED IN THEIR FAVOUR VIDE ANNX-A TO A14.

7

IN W.P.NOS.24340-24344/2013

BETWEEN:

1. M/S.BANGALORE LADIES WORKING BAR & RESTAURANT OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, NO.86, 5 TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD FLOOR, NATIONAL MARKET, GANDHI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 009, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI.GOPALAKRISHNA, S/O.LATE B.M.CHANDRAIAH SHETT, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

2. THANTRA BAR & RESTAURANT (BLUE FOX) WITH PUB, NO.80/1, II FLOOR, SHRINAGAR SHOPPING COMPLEX, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SHYLESH S.NAIK, S/O.LATE SRIDHAR NAIK, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.

3. BAYVATCH BAR & RESTAURANT, REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA HOLDER OF THE PROPRIETOR, SRI.B.S.PRASANNA GOWDA, S/O.SINGAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, NO.78/6, II FLOOR, RESIDENCY CHAMBERS, RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025.

8

4. SAKI BAR & RESTAURANT, NO.86, I & II FLOOR NATIONAL MARKET, 5 TH MAIN, GANDHI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 009, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI.B.C.GOPLAKRISHNA, S/O.B.M.CHANDRAIAH SHETTY.

5. MEHENDI BAR & RESTAURANT, NO.44/4, RESIDENCY CROSS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI.SADASHIVARAJA SHETTY, S/O.RAJU SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS. ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.K.M.NATARAJ, SR COUNSEL FOR SRI.B.S.SACHIN)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.

2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001,

3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE CITY, BANGALORE-560 001.

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (WEST), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR

9

GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (CENTRAL), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

6. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (NORTH), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

7. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (NORTH EAST), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

8. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (EAST), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

9. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, UPPARPET POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 001.

10. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WILSON GARDEN POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 025.

10

11. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 012.

12. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SILVER JUBILEE PARK POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 001.

13. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 025.

14. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KORAMANGALA POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 089.

15. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, COTTONPET POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 001.

16. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 001.

17. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 025.

18. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIVEKNAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 025.

19. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 011.

20. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HIGH GROUNDS POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 001.

11

21. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HENNUR BANASAWADI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 039. ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.RAVIVARMA KUMAR, A.G., SRI.JAGADISH MUNDARGI, G.A. & SRI.VIJAYAKUMAR A. PATIL, HCGP)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO INTERFERE WITH THE LAWFUL BUSINESS DONE BY THE PETITIONERS UNDER VALID LICENCES BY ENGAGING WOMEN EMPLOYEES AT THEIR RESPECTIVE BUSINESS PREMISES.

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

In all these petitions, the petitioners are seeking for a mandamus to restrain the respondents authority from interfering with the conducting of the business carried on by the petitioners in terms of the license which have been annexed to the petitions. The petitioners have also sought for a declaration that the action of the respondents authority in forcibly stopping the business

12 carried on by the petitioners during the subsistence of the license period is arbitrary, illegal and highhanded.

2. The facts in brief are that the petitioners claim to be the businessman who hold license in accordance with law including CL-9 license. The grievance putforth in the petitions is that the respondents have been interfering with their business without authority of law and in certain cases, the petitioners have been prevented from running their business even without there being formal order. Though such contentions have been urged in the petitions, at this juncture it was felt that each of the contentions need not be adverted to by filing a objection statement on behalf of the respondents, since subsequent to filing of the petitions, meetings have been held with the representatives of the petitioners and certain guidelines have been formulated. The petitions are taken up for consideration in that regard.

13

3. When the petitions are heard today, the learned Advocate General has filed a memo dated

08.07.2013. Along with the memo, the notification dated

06.07.2013 is enclosed. By the said government order, explicit Regulations have been framed for the proper conduct of the business of the petitioners and similarly placed businessmen keeping in view the safety and welfare of the employees employed therein, more particularly relating to the employment of women. At this juncture, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners would submit that though they have certain reservations with regard to some of the regulations, they are in the process of making an effort to implement the Regulations as far as it is practicable.

Hence, though they contend that liberty be reserved to the petitioners to revert back to the Government in the event of facing any practical difficulties in implementation of the regulations, it is also pointed out under the regulations itself, the Government has fixed 60 days time to comply with the same. Therefore, the

14 petitioners state that even if the time frame indicated therein lapses, the petitioners be granted the liberty of puttingforth their views to the Government thereafter and until such consideration is made by the Government, the implementation shall not be forced upon the petitioners immediately after the first 60 days. Taking note of these aspects of the matter and also taking into consideration that the Regulations have come into place only on

06.07.2013 and also taking note of the submission made by the learned Advocate General on behalf of the respondents that the petitioners would be permitted to carry on their lawful business without hindrance since the petitioners are also inclined to comply with the

Regulations, the petitions are disposed of without adjudicating the rights of the parties on merits.

4. In that view, the petitioners who are holding valid license to carry on their business shall be entitled to carry on with their business forthwith. Even if the respondents in some cases sealed their premises, no further proceedings need be followed, but to continue

15 their business, if the petitioners are in possession of their premises and comply with the Regulations in the manner indicated above. However, a direction is issued to the respondent No.1 to convene a meeting of the petitioners or their representatives after a period of three months and reassess the situation after taking into consideration the grievances that may be putforth by the petitioners or their representatives and consider as to whether the

Regulations would need any change or amendment thereafter. But in all eventualities the petitioners as well as the respondents shall strive to have all safeguards in place to secure the safety and protect the dignity of the women employees who are employed therein.

5. In terms of the above, the petitions are disposed of. In view of the disposal of the petitions,

IA.No.1/2013 for impleading is unnecessary to consider and accordingly it is disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE ST*