Civil Writ Petition No. 4496 of 2003 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 4496 of 2003 Date of Decision: 5.12.2008 S.K. Malhotra and Others …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Jayender Singh Chandail, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for respondents No.1, 3 and 4. Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for respondent No.2. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) 17 workmen of Haryana State Minor Irrigation and Tubewell Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as “the Corporation”) had preferred the present writ petition seeking quashing of orders dated 27.6.2002 (Annexure P17) and 14.1.2003 (Annexure P2) whereby respondent-Corporation was ordered to be closed. It has been pleaded that termination of petitioners being arbitrary and illegal is liable to be set aside. Petitioners claimed that they were grade III & IV employees of the Groundwater Directorate of the Corporation. Petitioners had earlier Civil Writ Petition No. 4496 of 2003 2 filed Civil Writ Petition No. 13697 of 2002 which was disposed off by a Division Bench of this Court along with 41 similar connected petitions directing respondents to review the matter and pass fresh order. The matter was reviewed and the appropriate Government passed impugned order (Annexure P20) on 14.1.2003. A perusal of the order reveal that the Corporation was established and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 1956”) as 100% Haryana Government Undertaking. On 30.4.2002, under sub Section (1) of Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 1947”) permission of the Government was sought for closure of the undertaking i.e. Corporation. Closure permission was sought on the ground that Corporation is left with no major activity/work to be carried on and its total paid up capital of Rs.10.89 Crores and a share capital of Rs.20.00 Crores has completely eroded. The Corporation had suffered accumulated loss of Rs.11,536.82 lacs and is unable to pay wage bill of employees amounting to Rs.35.53 Crores only. The salary of employees were being paid by the State Government. The Debt Recovery Tribunal, Chandigarh, had decreed in favour of the creditor banks amount of Rs.52.00 Crores against the Corporation. According to impugned order (Annexure P2) an enquiry envisaged under Sub Section (2) of Section 25-O of the Act 1947 was got conducted through the Joint Labour Commissioner, Haryana before whom the Management and Workers' Unions appeared and had projected their version. Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate, appearing for the petitioners, has Civil Writ Petition No. 4496 of 2003 3 urged that appropriate authority had not applied its mind that the respondent-Corporation was not a commercial organization but a public utility organization, therefore, enough financial resources could not be generated to sustain itself. The Corporation had to depend upon the budgetary support from the State Government. There is a budget provision of Rs.30.00 Crores and non plan budget of Rs.45.85 Crores in the State budget for the year 2002-2003. In the tenth Five Years Plan an outlay of Rs.120.00 Crores has been proved by the Planning Commission of the Corporation. Thus, it was contended that Corporation carried on essential sovereign function of providing irrigation to the farmers. Therefore, it was incumbent upon the appropriate authority to consider that activities of the Corporation were to be subsidized by the State Government. It was further submitted that the appropriate authority had not given thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the workmen, regarding all alternative possibilities suggested to make the Corporation viable should have been explored. It has been submitted that instead of closure of the Corporation right sizing the Corporation, was the answer. Mr. Vijay Sharma further submitted that under Sections 391 & 394 of the Act 1956, an endeavour should have been made to make arrangements of amalgamation or merger of the Corporation with other bodies. It has been submitted that the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 being statutory have not been resorted to. It was submitted that the State Government had advanced loans and dues were to be recovered for survival of the Corporation. The State ought to have converted loans advanced to the Corporation as equity. Civil Writ Petition No. 4496 of 2003 4 Mr. Narender Hooda, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation has placed reliance on the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3, wherein it has been stated that in the last 30 years, Corporation was getting aid from the World Bank. A written statement was filed on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3 by the Managing Director stating that in the last 30 years, the Corporation was carrying on its activities with the aid received and had made profits only for three years commencing in the years 1971-72, 1978-79 and 1979-80. It has been further stated that World Bank stopped to pay funds for carrying on WRCP-Phase2 Project. Mr. Hooda has further stated that an effort has been made by the Government in the year 2006-2007, according to which all workmen who had crossed the age of 55 years have been paid Rs.1,00,000/- along with the retrenchment compensation and those workmen who had crossed age of 55 years and had died, their legal representatives were paid Rs.2,00,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation and other persons having less than age of 55 years were appointed/absorbed in the different government Departments. A perusal of the order of appropriate authority will show that same has not been passed with malafide reasons. Appropriate Authority has followed principles of natural justice. In case of mis- management, exigencies of the situation or any other circumstances, if the Corporation is to be closed then the natural consequence have to flow and the retrenchment compensation is to be paid to the workmen. This Court cannot enter into the enquiry in the disputed Civil Writ Petition No. 4496 of 2003 5 questions of facts. The decision of the appropriate authority to close the Corporation has been rightly considered and upheld by the appropriate Government. The Government has drawn the policy for the absorption/employment of its workmen. Therefore, this Court cannot direct the appropriate authority to substitute its opinion with the opinion of the Court. Even otherwise the argument that Corporation is not engaged in commercial activity should be allowed to run with the budgetary support of the State Government or right sizing of the Corporation was required or the loan advanced by the State government should have been converted to equity cannot be examined while exercising writ jurisdiction. Fiscal management, its impact are to be left to the experts. This Court has only a limited role to play while exercising writ jurisdiction. The order passed is not malafide or for any extraneous reasons. All these grounds have been raised in the present writ petition, therefore, no interference is warranted and hence, the present writ petition is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge December 5, 2008 “DK”