Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1230 (ALL)

NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION LTD. v. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR

2017-05-09

ARUN TANDON, REKHA DIKSHIT

body2017
JUDGMENT By the Court.—An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Ministry of National Textile Corporation Limited, Government of India, New Delhi in response to the order passed by this Court on 17.4.2017 stating therein that there is no pending proposal for revival of the Company in question namely Ganesh Sugar Mills, a unit of Swadeshi Mining and Manufacturing Company Limited. It has further been stated that the Company is lyinclosed since 1994. It has been stated that the payment to the workers and some creditors has been made by the Ministry of Industries with reference to the direction issued by the Court from time to time. It has also been stated that a meeting between Swadeshi Mining and Manufacturing Company Limited Board and National Textile Corporation Limited did take place, but no project could be finalized for utilization of the land belong to Ganesh Sugar Mills a unit of Swadeshi Mining and Manufacturing Company Limited. It has been stated that two big pieces of land, measuring 633.98 acres and 105.74 acres owned by Ganesh Sugar Mills are agricultural land. It has been stated that the services of the employees have to be dispensed with from the date as may be fixed by the High Curt. For payment of dues of the employees and creditors sale of requisite area of the agricultural land may be undertaken under the orders of the Court. It has also been stated that a proposal to merge Ganesh Sugar Mills with National Textile corporation Limited is to be placed for consideration and approval of the Ministry of Textile, Government of India under the order of the High Court. 2. In the affidavit filed by the Managing Director, National Textile Corporation Limited practically same averments have been made. 3. Having examined the affidavit and the orders which have been passed in the present appeal, we find that the very basis for filing of the present appeal was that the National Textile Corporation is exploring the possibility to set up power loom unit and textile park over the land of Ganesh Sugar Mills and that the National Textile Corporation Limited will liquidate the liabilities of workers and creditors from its own resources without disposing of any property of Swadeshi Mining and Manufacturing Company Limited and that such proposal in principle has been approved by the Ministry of Textile and Ministry of Industries, Government of India. 4. 4. The aforesaid basis for filing of the appeal has been found to be false as would be reflected from the order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 18.10.2016 and the subsequent order passed by the Division Bench on 3.3.2017 The order dated 3.3.2017 reads as under: “On the matter being taken up today, Sri J. Nagar, Senior Advocate, has taken us through the averment mentioned in the affidavit filed pursuant to the directives issued by this Court, and keeping in explanation that has been so furnished as to under what circumstances, an incorrect statement of fact, came to be recorded is accepted to be sufficient, and accordingly, the apology stands accepted with a caution to be careful in future, while making statement before the Court. In pith and substance, this much is also clearly reflected that as of now, there is no proposal in pipeline that would show and substantiate revival of the unit in question. The issue is what next? Mention has been made that entire dues of workmen would be paid in phased manner. In this regard, it has also been contended that from the sale of the machinery, etc., the amount of Rs. 10 Crore has been collected and said amount would be handed over/disputed to the workmen, in the same manner, as it has been done in the past. In view of this, and as the liability of workmen stands accepted, we accordingly proceed to pass an order asking the Official Liquidator to release the amount of Rs. 10 Crore for settling of the workmen dues and whatever would be the further programme for settling the dues in the same manner as it was done in the past for settling remaining dues, matter would be taken up after six weeks.” 5. Having examined the present appeal as well the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we are of the considered opinion that the appeal having been made on a frivolous basis and without any foundation has to be dismissed. It is ordered accordingly. 6. Official Liquidator shall proceed to submit the necessary report for disposal of the assets of the Company as directed under the orders in Appeal dated 27.3.2014 on or before 6.7.2017 when the matter shall be listed next before the Company Court. 7. It is ordered accordingly. 6. Official Liquidator shall proceed to submit the necessary report for disposal of the assets of the Company as directed under the orders in Appeal dated 27.3.2014 on or before 6.7.2017 when the matter shall be listed next before the Company Court. 7. We may only record that this practice of filing of appeal on incorrect statement of facts is deprecated. 8. Pendency of the appeal before this Court since 2014 i.e. for nearly more than 3 years has only led to a situation where the public money has been wasted because of release of public funds by the Ministry concerned for payment of wages of the employees in respect of a Company which is non functional since 1994. 9. We direct the Ministry of Textile to take suitable action against the person, who has filed the present appeal and has falsely stated that In principle the Ministry of Textile and Ministry of Industries have agreed to the proposal submitted by the appellant when in fact no such proposal was either submitted or was under consideration. The question of accepting the proposal was therefore a deliberate incorrect statement. The Ministry should not take any lenient view in the matter in as much as a huge amount of public money has been wasted and officer responsible for such a situation must be brought to book. 10. We leave all further action to be taken as required to be examined by the Company Judge himself in the matter. The appeal is dismissed. 11. Parties are at liberty to approach the Company Court for their grievance in the matter of their dues.