Section 22(1) SICA stay does not survive a final winding-up order; post-winding-up rehabilitation reference is incompetent.

Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 applies only while an inquiry under section 16 is pending, a scheme under section 17 is under preparation, consideration or implementation, or an appeal under section 25 is pending. It does not stay proceedings after a final winding-up order has already been made. Once winding up is ordered, the board of directors ceases to function in law except for filing the statement of affairs, so a rehabilitation reference made thereafter is incompetent. The saving provision in section 31 preserves pending winding-up proceedings where a receiver or official liquidator has been appointed.

---

---

Issues: Whether section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 applies to stay further proceedings after a winding-up order has already been made, and whether a reference for rehabilitation made after such winding-up order is competent.

Analysis: Section 22(1) operates only where an inquiry under section 16 is pending, a scheme under section 17 is under preparation, consideration or implementation, or an appeal under section 25 is pending. The protection is directed against proceedings that are still pending before the company court and is not intended to suspend proceedings after a final winding-up order has been made. Once the company is ordered to be wound up, the board of directors ceases to function in law except for the limited purpose of filing the statement of affairs, and a purported reference made thereafter by persons claiming to be the board is incompetent. The saving provision in section 31 preserves pending winding-up proceedings where a receiver or official liquidator has already been appointed.

Conclusion: Section 22(1) was held inapplicable to the facts, the post-winding-up reference was treated as incompetent, and the prayer to stay further winding-up proceedings failed.

Final Conclusion: The request to halt the winding-up process after the final winding-up order was refused, leaving the liquidation proceedings to continue in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: The statutory stay under section 22(1) does not extend to proceedings after a final winding-up order, and a rehabilitation reference made after the company has been ordered to be wound up is incompetent because the board of directors no longer exists in law for that purpose.

---