D.J. Ezekiel vs Mandya National Paper Mills Ltd.

A.S. Bopanna

The applicant is before this Court seeking for a direction to the Official Liquidator to pay the amount as claimed in the proof of debt submitted in Form No. 66. The applicant has also sought for the payment of gratuity and other allowances in terms of the Voluntary Separation Scheme. Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the application papers.

The case of the applicant is that he was working in the Mandya National Paper Mills limited (hereinafter referred to as the ''Company in liquidation''). The said company was ordered to be wound up. Prior to the same, the applicant had certain dispute with the management of the Company in liquidation relating to his period of service since according to the applicant, he was entitled to the amounts regarding which he had filed the application u/s 33-C-2 of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short the ''I.D. Act''). In this regard, the applicant had filed three applications viz., Application No. 32/98. Application No. 33/98 and Application No. 30/2000.

In respect of the said applications, the applicant had sought leave from this Court to prosecute the said matters since the company was ordered to be wound up. this Court by the order dated 31.10.2003 passed in C.A. No. 776/2002 and connected applications granted leave to the applicant herein to prosecute the pending applications filed u/s 33-C (2) of the I.D.Act. The said applications have thereafter been concluded before the Labour Court. The Application No. 32/93 was disposed of on 10.02.2004 holding that the applicant herein is entitled to a sum of Rs. 1.17,152/towards annual increment and bonus during the period of suspension In Application No. 33/98, the Labour Court by its order dated 05.03.2004 held that the applicant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 22,222/- towards interest reimbursement for the said period. While in Application No. 30/2000. the Labour Court by its order dated 05.05.2004 held that the applicant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 91,663/- towards leave salary and bonus. In respect of the said orders made by the Labour Court, the applicant is stated to have filed an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Mandya, to initiate recovery proceedings against the respondent. However, in view of the company being wound up, the Deputy Commissioner had directed the applicant to make appropriate application for recovery of the amount before the Official Liquidator. It is in that context, the applicant filed the affidavit of proof of debt in Form No. 66 claiming a sum of Rs. 2,39,565/- based on the orders passed by the Labour Court. The Official Liquidator on entertaining the claim has adjudicated and rejected the said amount claimed by the applicant vide order at Annexure-F. The applicant has therefore assailed the said order and sought for the relief.

The respondent has filed the objection statement and the contention is that the applicant had applied under the Voluntary Separation Scheme and he was paid a sum of Rs. 2.21,470/-. The said amount is said to have been paid on 29.06.2000. It is in that context, the Official Liquidator was of the view that since the amount has already been paid to the applicant, the claim presently made cannot be admitted.

In this regard, it is to be noticed that the claim made by the applicant before the Labour Court was with regard to the increment, bonus, interest reimbursement and leave salary during different periods Indicated in the application, which was while he was in service but under suspension. The claims made therein does not relate to the amount payable under the Voluntary Separation Scheme which is for the left over service. That apart, what requires to be noticed is that as evident from the reason assigned by the Official Liquidator, the amounts under the Voluntary Separation Scheme was paid on 29.06.2000, while the orders of the Labour Court on which reliance has been placed by the applicant are much subsequent to the same i.e., 10.02.2004, 05.03.2004 and 05.05.2004.

Hence, in respect of the amount ordered by the Court subsequently, the Official Liquidator could not have rejected the same by taking note of the amount which has been paid under the Voluntary Separation Scheme, whereunder the amount payable under the scheme alone would be paid to the employee and the other amount which is claimed was in dispute before the Labour Court which was adjudicated subsequently. The same cannot be denied on that ground, more particularly when the suspension had continued till 29.06.2000. the date on which the Voluntary Separation Scheme was accepted. In any event, the contention that the amount paid under the Voluntary Separation Scheme would satisfy the claim before the Labour Court has not been put forth and the Labour Court was not concerned with that aspect of the matter while adjudicating the application made u/s 33-C (2) of the I.D.Act. Therefore, the amount granted by the Labour Court under the said three orders is to be considered for the purpose of payment, when the said orders have attained finality and have not been questioned in an appropriate forum as otherwise it would amount to the Official Liquidator sitting in judgment over the correctness of the order passed by the Labour Court. Hence, to the said extent, the Official Liquidator was not justified in rejecting the claim.

However, having noticed the objection-statement of the Official Liquidator that the relevant documents have not been produced before him, the applicant shall now produce the copies of the said orders and the Official Liquidator shall take note of the same for the purpose of grant of the claim to the said extent. Hence, the order dated 12.09.2005 impugned at Annexure-F is not sustainable and the same is accordingly set aside. With regard to the claim made by the applicant in. respect of the gratuity amount, I am of the opinion that the same cannot be considered at this stage by the Official Liquidator since there is no adjudication on that aspect of the matter by a competent authority. If at all. the competent authority grants the same, it would be open for the applicant to file the same before the Official Liquidator. Though the claim as made by the applicant based on the order of the Labour Court is accepted, it is needless to mention that the claim admitted shall be considered for payment in accordance with law on pari pasu basis as contemplated u/s 529A of the Companies Act.

In terms of the above, the application is allowed.