CENTRAL GOVERNMENT Vs. COMMISSIONER OF PAYMENTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question which arises for consideration in this case is the interpretation of Section 10(3) of the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nafionalisation) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).

(2.) Briefly stated the fact? are that the Central Government had promulgated the Sick Textile Undertaking (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1972. Under the said Act, the management of some sick mills was taken over without divesting all the owners of their ownership. The management of respondent No. 2 was sought to be taken over with effect from 31st October 1972.

(3.) Due to some legal proceedings which had been initiated. the actual management of respondent No. 2 was not handed over the erestwhile owners to the Central Government or to the Custodian. Secondly, with effect from 1st April 1974, the Sick Industrial Undertaking (Nationalisation) Act 1974 was promulgated. The sick mills including respondent No. 2 whose management was not taken over under the Act of 1972, were sought to be nationalised. There is no grievance in the present petition with regard to (he act of nationalisation.