- (1.) M. C. Agarwal, J. These are applications under Section 482, Cr. P. C. , seeking to quash th complaints lodged against the applicants under Section 630 of the Companies Act.
(2.) SINCE the points involved in all these cases are identical, with the consent of parties, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. The applicants, excepting R. Antony in Criminal Misc. Application No. 8158 of 1991, were employees of M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited, Renkoot, district Sonbhadra. As employees of the said company, they were allotted residential quarters by the employer for purposes of their residence during the term of employment. Applicant Jagdhari Ram was retired by the company from service with effect from 31 st December, 1991. The other appli cants have been dismissed from service by the said employer on various dates. In some cases, industrial disputes arising out of the dismissal/retirement have been referred to the Labour Court/industrial Tribunal and the same are pending. In some cases, conciliation proceedings under Rule 4 of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Rules are pending and in some cases, the employees' applications under Section 6-E (2) (b) of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act are pending. After the dismissal/retirement, the employer M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited asked the respective applicants to vacate the residential fiats occupied by them. Since the employees did not comply with the company's request, complaints Section 630 of the Companies Act have been lodged by the employer and the accused-applicants have been summoned by the Special Chief Judicial Magis trate, Allahabad. R. Antony, the applicant in Criminal Misc. Application No. 8158 of 199j, was an employee of M/s. Renusagar Power Company Limited. He has been dismissed with effect from 15th December, 1990. and Adjudication Case No 3 of 1990 about his dismissal is pending. The employee is also alleged to have made a complaint against the employer under Section 6-F of the Indus trial Disputes Act. The employer M/s. Renusagar Power Company Limited has lodged a complaint against the applicant because the latter has not vacated the company's residential accommodation that is occupied by him.
(3.) THE employer respondents filed counter-affidavits and the learned counsel for the applicants wanted time to file rejoinder-affidavits. THE learned counsel for the employer respondents then stated that he would not rely on the counter-affidavits and, therefore, the cases were heard on the agreement that the counter-affidavits filed by the employer respondents would not be looked into. The facts are not in dispute. All the applicants were allotted residen tial quarters by the employer in connection with their employment of the applicants has been terminated by retirement and dismissal etc. and in spite of oial and written requests by the employer, the employees have not vacated the residential quarters. A perusal of the dates of dismissal etc. and the dates on which the company lodged the complaints under Section 630 of the Com panies Act would show that the company has not acted in haste and the complaints were filed sufficiently after the termination of employment.;