ORDER : R.M. Chhaya, J. By way of this application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: "(A) Your Lordship may be pleased to allow the present application and further be pleased to direct the Official Liquidator of M/s. Gujarat Narmada Auto Ltd. to release the amount of Rs.30,000/(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) towards pending salary of 7 months i.e. from December, 1995 to June, 1996 along with interest @ 18% p.a. thereon from the date due till realisation for the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit in support of Judges' Summons and in the interest of justice and fairness of (B) Your Lordships be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as may be deemed fit, just and proper in the interest of justice and fairness of things." 1. It appears from the record that the applicant was working with M/s. Gujarat Narmada Auto Ltd. and was serving in the Stores Department. It appears from the record that since the Company became sick, as per Section 20(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) opined that the Company be wound up. It further reveals from the record that ultimately, the said order of BIFR in Case No.162 of 1989 was passed on 30.6.1995. It transpires from the record that the opinion of the BIFR was placed before this Court by way of filing a petition being Company Petition No.82 of 1995 and by an order dated 2.8.1995, this Court ordered winding up of the Company and the Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as liquidator of the Company. It further transpires that the Official Liquidator thereafter took possession of the assets of the Company and after following due process and approval of this Court, the assets of the Company more particularly land and building as well as plant and machineries and other movables were disposed of. It further transpires from the record that out of the sale of the land situated at Ahmedabad ad-measuring about 1,10,886 sq. mtrs., an amount of Rs.14.30 crores were received and the land was disposed of. It appears that by an order dated 12.7.2006 passed by this Court (Coram: A.S. Dave, J.) in Official Liquidator Report No.33 of 2006, the said proceedings were also confirmed. 2. mtrs., an amount of Rs.14.30 crores were received and the land was disposed of. It appears that by an order dated 12.7.2006 passed by this Court (Coram: A.S. Dave, J.) in Official Liquidator Report No.33 of 2006, the said proceedings were also confirmed. 2. In response to the notice issued by this Court, the Official Liquidator through learned advocate Mr. J.S. Yadav has filed a detailed report. The report filed by the Official Liquidator indicates that in compliance with the orders passed by this Court dated 11.10.2005 in Company Application No.262 of 2005 and allied matters as well as in Special Civil Application No.12100 of 2006, the Official Liquidator has disbursed the amounts in favour of the secured creditors and workers of the Company in liquidation which is more particularly set out in Para 5 of the report submitted in the present proceedings by the Official Liquidator. The Official Liquidator has further contended that as per the order dated 9.5.2002 passed by this Court in Company Application No.30 of 2000, 182 workmen have been paid their dues and the present applicant was at Sr. No.10. It further transpires from the report submitted by the Official Liquidator that as can be seen from the prayers prayed for in this summons, the applicant has claimed salary for the period from December, 1995 to June, 1996 (for 7 months along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum thereon from the date due till realization). The Official Liquidator has further submitted that the said claim is after the date of winding up and therefore, as per Section 445(3) of the Companies Act, 1956, no relation of employer and employee exists between the Company in liquidation and the applicant on and from the date of 2.8.1995. The Official Liquidator has also contended that only because some gratuitous payment was made to other employees of the Company in liquidation for the said period, it does not give any legal right to the present applicant to claim such amount at the belated stage when the account of the applicant is already settled by the Official Liquidator by making full and final payment of all his dues. It is specifically averred by the Official Liquidator in Para 13 as under: "13. It is specifically averred by the Official Liquidator in Para 13 as under: "13. That, as per the order, the Official Liquidator with the help of respondent No.2 i.e. GNFC was to make the payment and accordingly GNFC has submitted the calculation of amount payable to all the 182 workmen in which the name of the applicant is appearing at sr. No.10 and accordingly he is also paid the amount of Rs.1,61,425.77 vide Cheque No.418256 dated 12.8.2002 of Oriental Bank of Commerce. Copy of the said letter of GNFC and the relevant sheet showing calculation of dues given by GNFC where is the name of the applicant appeared and the payment made to him are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure H' (Colly.)" 3. It may be noted that the applicant has also made M/s. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizer Corporation as party respondent in the summons. It transpires from the record that the said Company was the sole creditor of the Company in liquidation. 4. Mr. Nandish Y. Chudgar, learned advocate for Nanavati Associates for respondent No.2 also reiterated the contentions raised by the Official Liquidator and has further submitted that in view of the provisions of Section 445(3) of the Act, no amount is legally payable to the applicant and all that was due and payable had already been paid to the applicant. 5. Ms. Falguni D. Trivedi, learned advocate for the applicant, relying upon the affidavit in rejoinder filed by the applicant, contended that the Official Liquidator and respondent No.2 Company are trying to mix two issues. Ms. Trivedi has invited attention of this Court specifically to the averments made in Paras 5, 6, 9 and 13 of the affidavit in rejoinder and has further contended that the amount of VRS and the amount of 7 months' salary are two different facets and even though the name of the applicant was included, the Official Liquidator has not made payment towards salary of 7 months as prayed for in the summons. Ms. Trivedi has further relied upon the fact that the workers of the Company in liquidation who were part of the hunger strike got benefit of the same. It is further contended that the amount of VRS is exclusive of the amount of salary for the period which is prayed for in the present summons. Ms. Trivedi has further relied upon the fact that the workers of the Company in liquidation who were part of the hunger strike got benefit of the same. It is further contended that the amount of VRS is exclusive of the amount of salary for the period which is prayed for in the present summons. It is contended that even though the necessary details were asked for, the office of the Official Liquidator has not provided the same, which in fact, has come on record of this application after the notice came to be issued in the present summons. 6. Considering the submissions made by the respective parties, it is appropriate to note that the applicant had earlier approached this Court by way of filing Company Application No.440 of 2003, wherein this Court (Coram: K.A. Puj, J. as he then was) vide order dated 10.8.2004 has observed thus: "The applicant is the Ex-employee of the Company in liquidation. He has taken out this Judges Summons for claiming the salary for the period from December, 1995 to June, 1996. This period is after the date of the winding up and the amount claimed is about Rs.30,000/. It is the say of the applicant that other employees were paid the salary for the month from December, 1995 to June, 1996. In support of his claim, the applicant has produced an affidavit of one Mr. Piyush Panchal, wherein he has specifically stated that the ex-employees were paid the salary from the month from December, 1995 to June, 1996. The said Mr. Piyush Panchal is also present in the Court. 2. Mr. Subhash G. Barot, learned advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that since all other ex-employees of the Company in liquidation were paid the salary for the period from December, 1995 to June, 1996, the applicant should not be denied the said benefit and this Court should direct the Official Liquidator to pay the amount as claimed in the present application being the salary for the period from December, 1995 to June, 1996. 3. I have heard learned advocate appearing for the applicant and the Official Liquidator. I have also gone through the Affidavit filed in support of the Judges Summons as well as the Affidavit filed by Mr. Piyush Panchal. 3. I have heard learned advocate appearing for the applicant and the Official Liquidator. I have also gone through the Affidavit filed in support of the Judges Summons as well as the Affidavit filed by Mr. Piyush Panchal. I have also gone through the report filed by the Official Liquidator and the two letters addressed by the Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. to Official Liquidator on 15.03.2003 and 27.11.2003, copies of the said letters were given to the learned advocate appearing for the applicant. In the said letters, it is specifically stated that the name of the applicant was appearing at Serial No.10 of the statement of legal dues and other amounts payable to the Ex-employees of Gujarat Narmada Auto Limited i.e. GNAL (In Liqn.) in terms of the order dated 09.05.2002 passed by this Court. The applicant has been paid the amount as per the said statement. Once such payment has been paid in full and final settlement, no other amount is payable to the applicant. Mr. Barot is not in a position to substantiate the claim of the applicant by pointing out any statutory provision or any legal authority in support of his claim. His only argument is that since other Ex-employees are paid, the applicant should not be discriminated. 4. In the above view of the matter, the Official Liquidator is directed to ascertain the veracity of the claim made by the applicant vis-a-vis the other Ex-employees and if the amount is paid to the other Ex-employees and if it is in accordance with the statutory Provisions of the Act, more particularly, keeping in mind the Provisions contained in Section 445 (3) of the Act, the said amount should be paid to the applicant. 5. With this direction and observation, the present application is accordingly disposed of." 7. This Court has in Para 4 directed the Official Liquidator to ascertain the veracity of the claim made by the applicant viz-a-viz the other ex-employees and if the amount is paid to the other ex-employees and if it is in accordance with the statutory provisions of the Act more particularly keeping in mind the provisions contained in Section 445(3) of the Act, the said amount should be paid to the applicant. It is an admitted position that the Company in liquidation came to be wound up vide order dated 2.8.1995 and it is crystal clear from the prayers prayed for in the present summons that the claim relates to the period after the date of winding up i.e. from December, 1995 to June, 1996. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid admitted position, it cannot be believed that the applicant was in active service because the Company was not in existence and as provided under Section 445(3) of the Act, the relationship of master and servant would not exist after the date of winding up. Therefore, even if the direction of this Court, as noted above, is considered, as per the provisions of the Act, the applicant would not be entitled to any such benefit. It may further be noted that and as pointed out by Mr. Yadav, learned advocate for the Official Liquidator as well as Mr. Chudgar, learned advocate for respondent No.2 that the gratuitous payment which was made to some of the employees was from the amount which was really part of the amount which respondent No.2 was entitled as a sole secured creditor. As rightly averred by the Official Liquidator in its report that all 182 workmen have been paid their dues and therefore, nothing is due and payable to the present applicant. It further appears from the record that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in its earlier order dated 10.8.2004 passed in Company Application No.440 of 2003, the Official Liquidator has informed the present applicant vide communication dated 4.10.2004 (Annexure E to the report of the Official Liquidator) that the applicant was found not to be entitled for any claim as prayed for in Company Application No.440 of 2003 as per the provisions of Section 445(3) of the Act. It appears that having received the same in 2004, the present summons is filed for almost similar prayers in the month of September, 2012. In view of the foregoing, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to any amount as claimed for in the summons and hence, the same is hereby rejected.