Textura vs. State Of U. P

ITEM NO.25 COURT NO.15 SECTION XI

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).33620/2015

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-09-2015 in CMWP No.40019/2015 28-09-2015 in CMA No. 335978/2015 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad)

M/S. TEXTURA . & ANR. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF U.P . & ORS. Respondent(s)

Date : 14-03-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA

	For Petitioner(s)	Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.
		Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.
		Mr. Saurabh Basoya, Adv.
		Ms. Aparajita Jha, Adv.
		Mr. Karan Singh, Adv.
		Ms. Divya Roy, AOR

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

1. Heard Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

2. The Office Report dated 13.03.2023 indicates that although the service was effected on the respondents including the affected contractual workers, none has entered appearance on respondent's behalf. Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2023.03.16 14:31:44 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified

3. The petitioners who were ordered by the competent authority under the Payment of Wages Act 1936, to disburse the unpaid wages for the contractual workers filed the Writ (C) No.40019/2015 in the High Court. In the said writ petition, the following order was passed by the High Court on 21.07.2015:-

"Learned standing counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondents no. 1, 3 & 4.

Issue notice to respondents no. 6 to 52.

Steps be taken within a week.

All the respondents shall file counter affidavit within four weeks.

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

List thereafter.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in the event of the petitioner depositing Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lacs) before the second respondent within two months from today, the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 6.12.2014 passed by the Prescribed Authority shall remain stayed.

The second respondent shall release Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs) in favour of the private respondents no. 6 to 52. Remaining amount shall be kept in a fixed deposit of a nationalized bank earning maximum interest.

In the event of default, the writ petition shall stand dismissed without reference of the Court."

4. When the requisite deposit was not made within the permitted time, the petitioners filed application for extension of time but the same was rejected by the High Court under the impugned order dated 28.09.2015.

5. The aggrieved writ petitioners/applicants then moved this Court where on 07.12.2015, the following order was passed:-

"After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the view that by directing the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs) which was determined

by the Payment of Wages Authority as the wages due and payable to the employees, the interim order granted by the High Court on 21.7.2015 can be revived. Therefore, while issuing notice, returnable in six weeks, the said interim order shall get revived subject however to the condition that the petitioners deposit Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lac) with the Prescribed Authority within four weeks from today, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners. On such deposit being made, the Prescribed Authority shall release a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs) in favour of the private respondent Nos.3 to 49 herein and the remaining amount shall be kept in a Fixed Deposit Account of a Nationalized Bank, initially for a period of six months, which shall be renewed periodically, pending further orders to be passed by the High Court. If the petitioners failed to comply with the condition now imposed, the benefit granted under this order will automatically cease to operate."

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lac) ordered to be deposited by this Court on 07.12.2015 has since been deposited with the prescribed authority and Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lac) of the deposited sum was then disbursed to the respondent Nos.3 to 49 and the balance amount is kept in fixed deposit in a Nationalized Bank.

7. Mr. Manish Kumar, the learned counsel then points out that because the petitioners failed to comply with the High Court's conditional order (21.07.2015), the writ petition itself came to be dismissed but now that the requisite deposit has been made, albeit on the strength of this Court's order, direction should be issued for revival of writ petition and consideration of the same on merit.

8. We have considered the submission made by the learned counsel and perused the materials on record. As the petitioners

3

have complied with this Court's order for depositing the ordered sum of Rs. 10 Lac, we deem it appropriate to order for restoration of the Writ (Civil) No.40019/2015 in the High Court's file. The same is ordered to be adjudicated on merit after affording opportunity to both sides.

9. With the above order, the Special Leave Petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

(DEEPAK JOSHI) (KAMLESH RAWAT)

COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR