Disposed

Ravindra and 39 Others v. Deputy Labour Commissioner Noida and 03 Others

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2018WRIC/37940/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought execution of recovery certificates for wages against a company-in-liquidation. The bench held that since liquidation proceedings are advanced and assets are with the Official Liquidator, the writ petition is disposed of, directing petitioners to approach the Official Liquidator or Company Court for relief.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to approach Official Liquidator or Company Court; Deputy Labour Commissioner may also approach for permission to recover dues.

Ravindra and 39 Others Vs Deputy Labour Commissioner… — Banking and Recovery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 7

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37940 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Ravindra And 39 Others Respondent :- Deputy Labour Commissioner Noida And 03 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nikhil Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjai Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

Though the present writ petition has been filed for relief that are not happily worded, however, in essence, the petitioners are seeking execution of the recovery certificates that they claim stand in their favour towards the payment of wages and other dues claimed from the company M/s International Electron Devices Ltd. & Others (hereinafter referred to as the company-in-liquidation).

¶8

The grievance of the petitioners are that though the amount have become due and had been quantified by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Noida under various orders some of which have been annexed with the writ petition, no recovery has yet been made of those amounts.

¶9

Upon earlier order passed by this Court, the Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as the bank) that has been impleaded as respondent no. 4 had filed its counter affidavit. By means of that counter affidavit, it has been brought to the knowledge of this Court that liquidation proceedings of the company M/s International Electron Devices Ltd & Others are underway before the Delhi High Court, in Company Petition No. 105 of 2011. It has been further stated that in proceeding the entire assets of the company-in-liquidation were handed over to the Official Liquidator attached to the Delhi High Court. Further upon order dated 03.02.2016, two immovable properties referred to as the "Okhla and Gautam Budh Nagar properties" in the order dated 03.02.2016 (passed by the Delhi High Court in Company Petition No. 105 of 2011), have been handed over to the bank with permission to sell the same to recover its dues.

¶10

In such circumstances, it is submitted that no relief can be granted to the petitioners with respect to any money

¶11

that has been recovered by the bank from the sale of the aforesaid two immovable property. In this regard it has also been stated that the bank has already sold the immovable property as permitted by the Delhi High Court vide order dated 03.02.2016 (noted above).

¶12

Having considered the nature of the claim made by the petitioners and the facts as have been noted above, the interest of justice would be best served if the present proceedings are concluded at this stage itself. Since the liquidation proceedings are at an advanced stage against the company-in-liquidation and apparently, the petitioners were not aware of the same, no direction can be issued to the State authorities to enforce the recovery certificate against the company in liquidation except with leave of the Company Court.

¶13

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following observations:-

¶14

(i) The petitioners may approach either to Official Liquidator attached to the Delhi High Court or that Company Court in accordance with law with respect to the dues being claimed by them.

¶15

(ii) In the event of such claim being filed before the official liquidator, it is expected that the said authority would entertain the same in accordance with law, keeping in mind the fact that the petitioners may not have been aware of the liquidation proceedings and had been bonafide pursuing their remedy before this Court.

¶16

(iii) It is also desirable that the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Noida, District-Gautam Budh Nagar may also approach that Official Liquidator and or the Company Court for permission to recover the dues of the petitioner workmen.

¶17

(iv) It is also clarified that the rights of the petitioners qua the bank, if any, would remain an issue to be decided in accordance with law and it is not for this Court to adjudicate that issue in favour of either of the parties.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.12.2018 S.Chaurasia

Ravindra and 39 Others v. Deputy Labour Commissioner Noida and 03 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra and 39 Others v. Deputy Labour Commissioner Noida and 03 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhoom Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Suresh Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shri 1008 Parshavnath Digambar Jain Mandir Samiti and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vakilu Khan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Balbir Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Vilok Pal Vs State of U P and 2 Others