R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) M /s. PML Industries Ltd. having its registered office in Sector 34-A, Chandigarh through its Managing Director Dr. A.S. Bindra and Dr. A.S. Bindra, Managing Director of the said Company (petitioners) have filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India against respondents No. 1 to 9, fully depicted in the head-note of the writ petition, and they have prayed that a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued and the orders dated 30.4.2001 (Annexure P-32) passed by respondent No. 1 and dated 9.5.2001 (Annexure P-34) passed by the Appellate Authority- respondent No. 2 rejecting the appeal of the petitioners be quashed as these are violative of the principles of natural justice and have been passed without showing any application of mind. It was further prayed by the petitioners that during the pendency of this writ petition the operation of the impugned orders may be stayed.
(2.) FROM the voluminous papers of the writ petition we have been able to derive at, that petitioner No. 1 M/s. PML Industries Ltd. was declared as a sick industrial company in terms of Section 3(1)(O) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI) was appointed as Operating Agency under Section 17(3) of the said Act to examine the viability of the Company and prepare a scheme for its revival. The Board also directed the Company to submit a fully tied up revival proposal to the Operating Agency for further action. The Board noticed that the Company is not taking any interest in the submission of any revival proposal and vide order dated 30.4.2001 passed the following order :- "In the hearing filed on 14.5.1999, the Bench has declared M/s. PML Industries Ltd. as a sick industrial company in terms of Section 3(1)(O) of the Act, and had appointed IDBI as the Operating Agency under Section 17(3) of the Act to examine the viability of the Company and prepare a scheme for its revival. The Company was directed to submit a fully tied up revival proposal to the OA. 2. In the hearing held on 14.7.2000, the Bench had noted that it was imperative for the Company/promoters to show greater seriousness as also to demonstrate their resourcefulness for the rehabilitation of the Company. The Bench had directed the Company/promoters to deposit Rs. 50 lacs in an interest bearing 'No Lien A/c' with IDBI (OA) within 3 weeks positively, negotiate OTS with the secured creditors and submit their comprehensive revival proposal to OA within 8 weeks. The Bench had also directed that if this amount was not deposited the Bench would issue order for change in management of the Company without any further hearing. Later, the Bench considered the submission made by the Company and granted it time upto 31.12.2000 to deposit the money with the OA and to submit its revival proposal. The Bench also issued notice on 1.12.2000 to the Company to show cause within three weeks as to why the Bench should not permit all secured creditors to file recovery suits against the Company/promoters/guarantors after 31.12.2000. If the Company fail to comply with the directions of the Bench as above. In its letter dated 14.12.2000, the Company had indicated that they were arranging a tie-up with a foreign Company. The Company, in view of the above, was allowed time upto 31.3.2001 to work out the arrangements with the foreign company and the bank extended the time upto 31.3.2001 for submitting a fully tied up revival proposal. Idbi (OA) in their letter dated 11.4.2001, submitted that the Company did not give any revival proposal even after 31.3.2001. It was further submitted that though the Company had indicated submission of proposal on OTS of dues of secured lenders, the OA was yet to hear about any settlement from the secured creditors. In their letter dated 25.4.2001, the Company submitted that they were in dire need of funds and the Bench may permit temporary withdrawal of Rs. 50 lacs deposited by them in the 'No Lien A/c' for two months.
(3.) IT is clear that there is no revival proposal available for our consideration at this stage. There is no settlement on OTS basis by the Company with the secured creditors either. The resourcefulness of the promoters is also in doubt in the light of the fact that they are unable to mobilize funds and are even seeking withdrawal of the money deposited in the 'No Lien A/c'. We, therefore, conclude that in the circumstances the Company will not be able to revive on its own. We, therefore, direct :- (i) The OA would prepare a Draft Rehabilitation Scheme on their own, restricting the reliefs/concessions from FIs/Banks strictly as per RBI guidelines and those from the State Government, if any, strictly as per the standard package available to sick industrial company. Such a scheme should be prepared by the OA within a period of two weeks, if not already done, and the same should be made available to the intended bidders including the present promoters who would also be free to submit a revival proposal of its own in response to the advertisement to be issued by the OA. (ii) IDBI (OA) would issue an advertisement for change in management of the Company within 15 days of the receipt of this order, inviting offers for take over/leasing/amalgamation/merger for rehabilitation with or without One Time Settlement (OTS) of the dues of the FIs/Banks, giving four weeks time for submission of offers. The present promoter may also submit an offer in response to the advertisement issued by the OA. (iii) The OA would evaluate the relative merits of the offer received and submit a report to the Board within further 4 weeks, after holding a joint meeting to arrive at an agreed package. They would also send an interim Statute Report to the Board, indicating inter alia, the position of offers received in response to the advertisements. (iv) If no concrete rehabilitation proposal with means of finance fully tied up is received in response to the advertisement issued by the OA, the Bench may consider passing further appropriate order which may include issue of a show cause notice for winding up of the Company without holding any further hearing. (v) The cost of the advertisement would initially be born by IDBI (OA) and it would be subsequently shared by the secured creditors on a pro- rata basis within 15 days of the receipt of the bills from the OA. The OA would not delay the release of advertisement on this account.;