Suresh Narayan Singh vs Tayo Rolls Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 457 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal will not interfere with an adjudicating authority's direction that workers be permitted to withdraw their provident fund amounts where the direction is expressed as permitting withdrawal in accordance with the rules governing the trust, and the Resolution Professional has undertaken to cooperate with such withdrawals to the extent the rules permit. Observations by the adjudicating authority on principles of statutory interpretation, which do not themselves restrain the workers' entitlement to withdraw from their provident fund account, create no fetter on the workers' rights and need not be disturbed.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Suresh Narayan Singh ...Appellant
Versus
Tayo Rolls Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Akhilesh Shrivastava, Advocate with Ms. Suhita Mukhopadhyay, CS.
For Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Kr. Singh, Advocate.
ORDER
(Virtual Mode)
28.04.2022: Two days delay in filing the Appeal is condoned. I.A. No. 1203 of 2022 stands disposed of.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional. This Appeal has been filed by the Authorised Representative of the workers aggrieved by the order dated 11.02.2022 by which IA (IB) No. 460/KB/2021 in CP (IB) No. 701/KB/2017 has been disposed of. The I.A. (IB) No. 460/KB/2021 was filed by the Authorised Representative of the Workers of the Corporate Debtor and sought for realization of all the amount accumulated in favour of the workers in their PF Account. The Adjudicating Authority has decided the application and in Para 11 has issued following directions:
"11. We urge all the Trustees to keep in mind the sufferings of the workmen in not having been paid any wages since October, 2016, and consider the applications from the workmen for withdrawals liberally, and in tune with the object and intent of the instruction issued by the Government and the PF
Cont'd..../ -2-
authorities. Completion of formalities should not be a goal in itself, but should subserve the greater good, which is the interest and wellbeing of workers."
3. The grievance of the Appellant is that although the order is in their favour but workers are unable to withdraw the amount from their accumulated PF amount since 2016.
4. Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that the Resolution Professional is bound to comply with the directions of the Adjudicating Authority permitting withdrawal of the PF amount, however, the withdrawal has to be as per the rules which are governing the Trust.
5. Be it as it may. The Adjudicating Authority having allowed the workers to withdraw the PF amount as per Rules, we see no reason to interfere in the matter, more so, when the Resolution Professional who is present before us submits that Resolution Professional shall be cooperating with the workers in withdrawal of PF Amount to the extent as permissible in Rules.
6. Learned counsel for the Appellant lastly submits that observations in Para 5 of the impugned judgement create a fetter in the rights of the Appellant. We have seen Para 5 in which the Adjudicating Authority has noticed the principles of statutory interpretation. We are of the view that in Para 5 there is no fetter in the rights of the workers for withdrawal from their PF Account. With these observations, this Appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 457 of 2022
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free