TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the affirmative. The Labour Court has not granted reliefs of reinstatement, continuity of service and back wages. Instead, the Labour Court has directed payment of compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of References, i.e. 21 December 2005 till realization by holding the terminations to be illegal. 2. The workers/employees were employed by the employer on various dates as Data Preparation Operators. The employer transferred the employees from Mumbai to various places as under: Anil Vishwanath Nandoskar - Chennai, Sanil Suresh Manjrekar - Chandigarh, and Milind Krishna Gawade - Calcutta 3. The employees challenged the transfer orders by filing a complaint of unfair labour practice before the Industrial Court at Mumbai and prayed for interim relief. However, the Industrial Court rejected the application for interim relief. In view of the rejection of prayer for interim relief, the employees reported for duties at their respective transferred places at Chennai, Chandigarh and Calcutta. It appears that the workers applied for leave and returned to Mumbai. By orders dated 7 June 2004, which were brande....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 SCC OnLine Bom 3550 and Reliance Naval and Engineering Limited v. M/s. Afcons Infrastructure Limited 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 6082. She also relies on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in McNally Bharat Engineering Company Limited v. Metso India Pvt. Ltd. OMP (COMM) 362/2018, decided on 3 August 2026. 7. Ms. Kochar accordingly prays for disposal of the Petitions in view of acceptance of the resolution plan with permission to the new management of the company to withdraw the entire deposited amounts alongwith accrued interest. 8. Per contra, Mr. Patil the learned counsel appearing for the employees submits that the impugned awards have been passed well before subjecting the Company to CIRP. He submits that the rights of the employees are crystallized under the impugned Awards. That therefore subsequent initiation of CIRP or acceptance of resolution plan cannot have the effect of extinguishment of crystallized rights of the workers. He submits that amount deposited in this Court cannot be treated as an asset of the company. That the deposit is made in pursuance of order passed by this Court and therefore, it is an amount under control of this Court. In support, he relies on jud....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmination is perverse. I accordingly proceed to uphold the findings recorded by the Labour Court that termination of the workers/employees in the present case is illegal. 12. Though the employees succeeded in establishing that their termination/dismissal was illegal, the Labour Court did not grant relief of reinstatement, continuity or back wages in their favour. Instead, they have been awarded compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- each along with interest. Though employees had challenged award of compensation and had pressed for relief of reinstatement and backwages in their own Petitions, Mr. Patil has fairly conceded that the employees no longer desire to work with the Company and have accordingly given up the challenge to the Awards passed by the Labour Court. 13. In view of the above discussion, the impugned Awards passed by the Labour Court will have to be upheld. 14. As observed above, while admitting the Petitions, this Court had directed the employer to deposit the awarded amount of compensation. Accordingly, various amounts have been deposited in each of the Petitions by the employer, which are invested by the Registry in fixed deposits. The maturity value of various fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 21.04.2025, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court by relying upon the earlier Judgments at paragraphs no. 50, 50.1,51.52 has held that it is now well settled that once resolution plan is duly approved by the adjudicating authority under Sub-section 1 of Section 31 all claims which are not part of the resolution plan shall stand extinguished and no person will be entitled to initiate or continue any proceedings in respect of the claim which is not a part of the resolution plan. In the case of Essar Steel India Ltd. Committee of Creditors Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta, (2020) 8 SCC 531, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had categorically declared that a successful resolution applicant cannot be faced with undecided claims after the resolution plan is accepted. Otherwise this would amount to a hydra head popping up which would throw into uncertainty the amount payable by the resolution applicant. It has been further observed that the lifting of the moratorium does not mean that the claim of the respondent would stand revived notwithstanding approval of the resolution plan by the adjudicating authority. Moratorium is intended to ensure that no further demands are raised or adjudicated upon during the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ors. At that time, the proceedings before the Labour Court initiated by the workers/employees were pending. The resolution plan was approved by NCLT on 14 May 2024, under which the new management took over the Company. The new management applied to the Labour Court seeking disposal of the Reference in view of approval of resolution plan. However, the Labour Court rejected the application of the Company holding that the claim of the workmen therein for reinstatement was tenable. The order passed by the Labour Court was under challenge before this Court. 18. On the other hand, facts of the present case are entirely different. The references made at the instance of the workers/employees are decided by Awards dated 7 February 2011, when the Company was not under the CIRP. Thus, adjudication in respect of termination of the employees has already taken place on 7 February 2011. The CIRP was initiated subsequently on 19 January 2023 and the resolution plan has been approved on 15 December 2023. Thus, as on the date of initiation of CIRP and acceptance of the resolution plan, the adjudication in respect of claims for reinstatement was already made. Rights of the employees to receive ben....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der of the court/authority before the higher forum. Payment thereof to the employee is delayed during pendency of the challenge. 22. If deposited amount of gratuity during pendency of Appeal before the Appellate Authority is treated as an asset of the employer under CIRP with entitlement of the new management to receive the same, the employee would be deprived of gratuity. In such circumstances, the new management of the employer will withdraw the deposited amount of gratuity by application of clean slate principle. Is this the legislative intent? The answer, to my mind, appears to be in the negative. 23. Both the learned counsel have relied on judgments in support of their pleas as to whether the deposited amount would be the asset of the corporate debtor or not. Mr. Patil has relied upon judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Rajendra Prasad Bansal (supra) whereas Ms. Kochar had relied on subsequent Division Bench judgments in Siti Networks Limited and Reliance Naval Engineering Limited (supra) and of Single Judge of Delhi High Court in McNally Bharat Engineering Company Limited (supra). In my view, it is not necessary to decide the issue as to whether amount deposited....