SHELL FIN INVEST PVT LTD Vs. AAIFR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed making a grievance that the AAIFR vide its order dated 3.6.2005 has made it clear that the rehabilitation scheme prepared by the Workers' Union and vetted by OA should be circulated to the concerned parties/stake holders. Our attention has also been drawn to an application dt. 28.7.2006 filed by the appellant before the AAIFR inter alia praying for circulation/publication of the DRS prepared by the OA for inviting consents/suggestion/objections in accordance with the requirements of Section 19(2) and 18(3)(a) of SICA, 1985 read with Regulations 28 and 29 of BIFR Regulations, 1987 and fix the next date of hearing for consideration of the objections/suggestions made by all concerned after allowing the statutory period for consideration of the same, as provided under Section 19(2) of SICA. It is contended before us that no order has been passed by the AAIFR on their application so far. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the SBI has contended that the endeavour of the AAIFR is to get the best possible deal for rehabilitation of the sick industries. In any event, we have also observed from the order passed by the AAIFR dated 27.3.2006 that as and when any bids are called, the appellant shall have opportunity for making fresh application. Learned counsel for the appellant states that this is with regard to the disinvestment and not for the scheme. Therefore, we are not passing any order. It will be proper and in the interest of justice that the application of the appellant pending before the AAIFR as mentioned above, be disposed of in accordance with law. Liberty is granted to the parties, if they feel aggrieved with the order passed by the AAIFR, they may approach this Court.

(2.) At this stage, we are not dealing with the issue of impleadment.

(3.) In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of.