HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 20915 OF 2010. DATED 23RD AUGUST, 2010. BETWEEN Parkins Textiles Workers Federation, Rep. By its General Secretary, V.Krishna Reddy ….Petitioner and The authorized Officer, Indian Bank, Circle Office, Chittoor, A.P. And ors. ….Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 20915 OF 2010 ORDER: ( Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) Assailing the action of the ﬁrst respondent in proceeding with proclamation of sale dated 16.07.2010 by way of conducting auction of the third respondent- properties, this Writ Petition is filed. It is stated in the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the Writ Petition that in the third respondent-mill, about 325 employees were employed and due to family disputes among the employer of the mill and other certain problems, it led to lay oﬀ in April, 2003. The third respondent-mill was, however, resumed in December, 2004, but salary was not paid for the lay-oﬀ period. It is further stated that before lifting the lay oﬀ, a settlement under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act was arrived at and the workmen agreed to resume work. As the third respondent-mill proposed to reduce the salary of the work, the workmen went on strike from 14.12.2005. However, the strike was called oﬀ and the workmen resumed to duty on 1.4.2006 and worked till 26.9.2006. It is further stated that the third respondent- mill declared lock out on 26.09.2006 without prior notice. Therefore, the petitioner-Union raised an industrial dispute against the said lockout. As no settlement was arrived at in between the petitioner- workers union and the third respondent-mill management, the conciliation oﬃcer has given failure report and the Government referred the dispute to Labour Court, which was taken on ﬁle in I.D.No. 170 of 2007 and the same is said to be pending adjudication. In the meanwhile the secured creditor-ﬁrst respondent obtained recovery certiﬁcate dated 6.6.2006 in respect of the attached properties of the third respondent-mill for a sum of Rs.3,48,01,609.91 and attached its property and issued proclamation of sale on 16.7.2010 ﬁxing the public auction on 24.8.2010. It is the grievance of the petitioner that if the recovery oﬃcer is allowed to go ahead with auction, the entire property of the third respondent-mill will be adjusted towards the dues of the bank alone and in such event, the petitioner-workers will be put to serious loss and great hardship, without paying dues such as Gratuity, Provident fund, salary etc.,. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner at length. Perused the material papers on record. We are of the considered opinion that the Writ Petition is misconceived. There is no privity of contract between the petitioner-workers federation and the ﬁrst respondent- secured creditor of the third respondent mill so as to issue Mandamus as prayed for. It is needless to mention that if the sale proclamation is allowed to go on, the secured creditor-ﬁrst respondent as well as the petitioner-workers federation will realise their dues as stated supra. Further, it is to be observed that the dispute with regard to payment of salary dues etc., is pending before the Labour Court in I.D.No. 170 of 2007 and it is for the petitioner-union to take steps for early disposal of the said ID. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition lacks merit and is therefore liable to be dismissed. Accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs. --------------------------------------------- JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED ----------------------------------- JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH 23rd August, 2010. Msnr.