Judgment : L. Narasimha Reddy, J. The respondent-company was referred to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR). After the effort of reconstruction of it failed, the BIFR directed its liquidation and accordingly, necessary orders were passed in R.C.C.No.2 of 1992 by this Court. The appellant advanced certain amounts to the respondent-company. To realize them, it has brought some assets of the respondent to sale, by remaining outside the liquidation. A sum of Rs.160.00 lakhs is said to have been realized. The Official Liquidator (O.L.) has initiated various steps under the Companies Act (for short ‘the Act’) and the Rules made thereunder vis-à-vis the respondent. An issue pertaining to payment of workmen’s dues, provided for under Section 529 of the Act and ascertainment of other liabilities, has arisen. Therefore, he proposed to publish a notice contemplated under Rule 148 of the Companies (Court) Rules 1959 (for short ‘the Rules’). The probable expenditure therefor was mentioned as about Rs.2,00,000/-. Stating that the company has no available assets as of now, the O.L. filed C.A.No.1858 of 2011 with a prayer to permit him to invite claims against the company, issue advertisements and to require the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. The application was opposed by the appellant. It was pleaded that basically, it is the obligation of the O.L. to issue advertisement and to incur expenditure therefor either from the assets of the company, if available, or from the funds made available to him by the Central Government, and that there is no justification for him to insist upon it to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. The learned Single Judge passed an order, dated 17.04.2012, allowing the application and requiring the appellant to pay the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. The said order is challenged in this Original Side Appeal. Sri Vivek, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that Rule 292 of the Rules, in clear and categorical terms, mandates that the O.L. must incur expenditure either from the assets of the company under liquidation or from the funds made available to him by the Central Government, and the direction issued against the appellant for payment of the amount cannot be sustained in law. Sri M.Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the Official Liquidator, on the other hand, submits that the respondent-company has no other assets now, and since the appellant has already realized Rs.160.00 lakhs, it was required to pay amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. He further submits that once the assets of the company accumulate, the appellant would be repaid the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. It is not in dispute that the appellant herein was one of the secured creditors of the respondent. To realize the amount due to it, it has chosen to remain outside the liquidation and was successful in procuring a sum of Rs.160.00 lakhs. It is not clear before this Court as to whether the respondent had any other assets or whether any other secured creditors have realized funds by selling its assets. Rule 148 of the Rules places an obligation upon the O.L. to issue an advertisement in two newspapers inviting claims and objections vis-à-vis the debts and claims against the company. The provision reads as under: “Rule 148. Notice to Creditors: (1) The liquidator shall give not less than 14 days’ notice of the date so fixed by advertisement in one issue of a daily newspaper in the English language and one issue of a daily newspaper in the regional language circulating in the State or Union Territory concerned, as he shall consider suitable. Such advertisements shall be in Form No.63. (2) The Liquidator shall also give not less than 14 days’ notice of the date fixed, in a winding-up by the Court, to every person mentioned in the statement of affairs, as a creditor, who has not proved his debt and to every person mentioned in the statement of affairs as a preferential creditor, whose claim to be a preferential creditor has not been established or is not admitted, or where there is no statement of affairs, to the creditors as ascertained from the books of the company and, in any other winding-up, to each person who, to the knowledge of the Liquidator, claims to be a creditor or preferential creditor of the company and whose claim has not been admitted, to the last known address or place of abode of such person. Such notice shall be in Form No.64 or 65 as the case may be, and shall be sent to each creditor by pre-paid letter post under certificate of posting.” The objective underlying the Rule is to ensure that no secured creditor is left in the context of distribution of assets of the company. In case the company under liquidation is possessed of any liquid assets, there would not be any difficulty or problem for the O.L. to incur expenditure not only for issuing advertisement, but also for other ancillary works. However, where the company was not possessed of any such assets by the time it has gone for liquidation, or the liquidator did not come into possession of any assets in the process, the pooling of funds for incurring the expenditure to advertisement would certainly become an issue. Obviously, contemplating such a situation, the rulemaking authority framed Rule 292 of the Rules, which reads as under: “Rule 292.Where the Company has no available assets: Where a company against which a winding-up order has been made has no available assets, the Official Liquidator may, with the leave of the Court, incur any necessary expenses in connection with the winding-up out of any permanent advance or other fund provided by the Central Government, and the expenses so incurred shall be recouped out of the assets of the company in priority to the debts of the company.” When the Rule is so clear, the O.L. is not entitled to file an application, seeking a direction that a particular secured creditor must incur the expenditure for advertisement. He can either summon that or otherwise pool amounts from the assets of the company and incur expenditure therefrom. If that is not possible, he has to use the funds that are made available to him by the Central Government. Either way, he cannot choose one of the creditors or the sole creditor in the context of incurring expenditure for advertisement. In a given case, though a secured creditor may have realized amounts from the assets of the company by remaining outside the liquidation, the funds so realized can certainly be treated as assets of the company available for ratable distribution, if it is noticed that there are other secured creditors, or for discharging other statutory liabilities. In a given case, though a secured creditor may have realized amounts from the assets of the company by remaining outside the liquidation, the funds so realized can certainly be treated as assets of the company available for ratable distribution, if it is noticed that there are other secured creditors, or for discharging other statutory liabilities. In such an event, the funds that are available with the secured creditor cannot be treated as his own money or funds. They fall into the category of assets of the company, though with some different characteristics. Hence, we hold that the O.L. is not entitled to require the appellant to incur the expenditure for advertisement and that he shall be entitled to incur that expenditure either from the available assets or the funds that are made available to him by the Central Government. In this case, in compliance with the interim order passed by this Court, the appellant has advanced a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and the advertisement has since been issued. We direct that the O.L. shall refund that amount to the appellant after he gets the funds either from the appellant or any other source to be treated as assets of the company. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. The miscellaneous petitions filed in this appeal shall also stand disposed of.