- (1.) THESE writ petitions are by some individuals employed in the Project and Development India Ltd. Sindri and some Unions representing the workmen.
(2.) THE essential challenge in these writ petitions is to the scheme for revival of the company to be examined by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) Admittedly, the company had invoked the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and it was referred to the BIFR in the year, 1992. With the Central Government approval, certain steps were taken as part of the revival package. The approval of BIFR is still awaited. These writ petitions essentially seek to challenge the mode adopted for proceeding with the scheme before the BIFR. Earlier, the claim was sought to be challenged in WP (PIL) No. 4946 of 2003. This Court by judgment dated 30.1.2004, dismissed the writ petition. After referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Balco Employees Union (Regd.) v. Union of India and Ors., 2002 (1) JCR 339 (SC): (2002) 2 SCC 333, this Court held : - - "It, is seen that the decision on the closure of the Research Wing which is the main target of attack by the petitioner, was approved by the Central Government after taking note of the entire circumstances. The company itself had taken that decision after weighing the pros and cons, here again, as a matter of policy, and ensuring the economic viability of the company. On the materials it is seen that steps have been taken carefully and after considering all the relevant aspects. There is no arbitrariness or unreasonableness shown in the decision making process."
(3.) THUS , on examining the materials, this Court had found that the scheme which was sought to be implemented, was not vitiated by any bias, justifying interference by this Court.;