Balance of convenience defeats interim stay where takeover of an industrial undertaking serves revival, employment and public interest.

Interim stay of an order authorising takeover of an industrial undertaking was refused because the balance of convenience and comparative hardship favoured allowing the management transfer to proceed. The court noted that suspension would prolong unemployment of workmen, delay revival of a unit producing an essential commodity, and reduce the undertaking's value, while refusal would not cause substantial prejudice to the appellant. The order was linked to the statutory basis of the Central Government's satisfaction that the unit could be restarted and that restart would serve public need for scheduled articles. The stay application was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether interim stay of the order permitting takeover of the management of the industrial undertaking should be granted pending appeal.

Analysis: The refusal of stay turned on the balance of convenience and the comparative prejudice to the parties and to the public. Granting stay would prolong unemployment of the workmen, delay restarting of an industrial unit producing an essential commodity, and depress the value of the undertaking. Refusing stay would not prejudice the appellant, while it would permit the authorised person to take over the management subject to the result of the appeal and preserve the possibility of a running unit fetching a better value. The Central Government's satisfaction under section 18FA that the undertaking could be restarted and that restarting would serve the public need for scheduled articles was treated as the relevant statutory basis for the takeover application.

Conclusion: Interim stay was refused and the application was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Interim stay of an order authorising takeover of an industrial undertaking should be refused where the balance of convenience, public interest, and comparative hardship lie against suspension of the order and no substantial prejudice to the applicant is shown.

---