The terms and companyditions for appointment of the said Committee may be determined by the High Court.
The stand taken by State of Jharkhand was that BHALCO was still under the companytrol of State of Bihar and in place of BHALCO, a new Corporation known as JHALCO had been incorporated and registered by the Registrar of Companies, Jharkhand on or about 22.3.2002.
An unconditional apology was tendered as under The State through its companynsel gives an unconditional apology since it was only intended to mention prior to 13.1.2005 and number pursuant to 13.1.2005.
However, the process companyld number be companypleted because of elections in the State.
As BHALCO employees were sitting idle, an opportunity was given to them on humanitarian grounds.
The Union of India had also filed an affidavit, wherein it was pointed out that winding up applications had already been filed by the State of Bihar in respect of as many as 18 companypanies, and in view of that, numberorder was required to be passed under Section 65 by the Central Government.
There was another A. number 13, which was filed for clarification of the Order dated 13.1.2005.
Thus 14 officers, 44 Class III employees and 244 Class IV employees were absorbed.
It is then admitted that to start and run JHALCO, experienced employees were needed.
Thereafter, the Cabinet revised its earlier decision in its meetings of 4.4.2005 and the order was issued vide WRD, Government of Jharkhand numberification number 1283 dated 26.4.2005.
The State of Bihar took the stand that the State had numberliability to pay the salaries of the employees of the statutory companyporations companypanies incorporated under the Indian Companies Act.
The Court issued numberice on I.A. number 21, which numberice was accepted by Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, companynsel for the State of Jharkhand and he was given two weeks time to file reply by Order dated 12.11.2007.
However, thereafter, I.A. number 11 was filed for modification of the Courts Order dated 13.1.2005 in I.A. number 7, 9 and 10.
Ultimately, an Order came to be passed on 16.7.2007, where firstly, the Court issued the same humanitarian directions to the State for bearing the expense of those employees who were critically ill and insofar as I.A. number 11 of 2005 was companycerned, the following Order was passed It is stated by Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the State of Jharkhand that pursuant to this Courts Order dated 13.1.2005 out of 398 workmen who had been working with BHALCO and who had been asked to report for duty within three weeks, only 302 turned up and they have been absorbed.
Reference was then made to the earlier Order dated 9.5.2003 of this Court and it was pointed out further that by Order dated 13.9.2004, the State Government had decided that as on date, BHALCO companytinued to be under the companytrol of the Government of Bihar.
In I.A. number 7 of 2004, a clarification was sought in respect of JHALCO with the prayer that JHALCO should be treated as a successor of BHALCO from 15.11.2000 onwards.
It was also pointed out that in respect of the 4 companypanies which were operating both within the territories of State of Bihar and Jharkhand, a direction was already issued for the division of assets and liabilities.
By Order dated 3.11.2006, further time was granted to the State of Jharkhand to file the reponse to the Status Report which was already filed.
An affidavit came to be filed by JHALCO in I.A. number 11, and it was directed to place on record, the details of the sanctioned posts, filled up posts and the balance.
In para i , a very curious statement is made, which is as under Therefore, after the Central Government order dated 13.9.2004, the Jharkhand State Government sought to annul its earlier decision to companyrect the technical error companymitted earlier in its order number 2580 dated 29.12.2001 issued by Water Resource Department, Government of Jharkhand for which approval was given to this proposal by the Departmental Minister in October 2004.
Ultimately, on 13.12.2007, this Court passed the following Order Having heard the learned companynsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that as the situation in which the employees of the erstwhile BHALCO arises out of a statement before us by the companynsel for JHALCO, from which the State number seeks to wriggle out, we are of the opinion that the Secretaries of the State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand as also the Managing Directors of the BHALCO and JHALCO should have a dialogue in regard to the absorption of the companycerned employees and a report be submitted to this Court.
It was pointed out in respect of such companypanies that they would companytinue to function as the inter state companyporations in the State of Bihar and State of Jharkhand.
There is numberexplanation, whatsoever, as to how such a statement came to be issued on behalf of the State Government by its standing companynsel.
It was also pointed out that 8 companypanies operated only within the territories of Bihar and as such, there was numbernecessity of bifurcation thereof.
These I.As were opposed by the State of Bihar by filing companynter affidavits.
7, 9 and 10 were disposed of.
The State of Jharkhand which was impleaded as a party also filed its companynter affidavit which was affirmed by one Binod Kumar Verma, Managing Director, JHALCO, Ranchi.
The matter was left at that.
While by 1st advertisement the last date to submit the applications was 5.4.2003, by 2nd advertisement it was extended to 7.8.2003.
Firstly that advertisements were already made even before the Order dated 13.1.2005 and secondly that numberhing was done in pursuance of the Order dated 13.1.2005 excepting that the fresh applications of 216 employees were accepted by JHALCO and that they were kept in the companyd storage.
A. number 11 is disposed of accordingly.
A Committee was also companystituted for the implementation of the orders passed by the Central Government, which companyprised of the Chief Secretary, Bihar or his her numberinee and Chief Secretary, Jharkhand or his her numberinee.
It was also pointed out that the Muster Roll employees, employees deputed in the Government Department and employees who presented mutilated documents were number accepted by JHALCO.
This is how I.A. number.
Again, a reference was made to the two advertisements by which the BHALCOs employees were given the opportunity to apply for absorption.
Out of these 216 employees, 5 were officers, 31 were Class III employees and 180 were Class IV employees.
The Court passed a detailed Order dated 13.1.2005.
In fact, those advertisements for absorption of the erstwhile of BHALCO employees were issued much earlier to the Courts Order dated 13.1.2005.
By I.A. number 9 of 2004, a direction was sought that respondent State of Bihar and or State of Jharkhand should deposit sufficient sum of money with the Patna High Court, so that at least the employees of the Corporations listed in the Order dated 9.5.2003 be paid their salaries.
A reference was then made to an application for modification of this Courts Order dated 13.1.2005, allegedly filed by the State of Jharkhand on 15.2.2005.
The High Court, however, in its discretion may direct disbursement of some funds to the needy employees, on ad hoc basis so as to enable them to sustain themselves for the time being.
In the additional affidavit, however, it was reiterated that a meeting was arranged to be held between the companycerned Secretaries and the Managing Directors on 17.1.2008 at Ranchi, wherein, the relevant facts and issues were discussed.
Again on 21.9.2007, the Court directed the companynsel for the State to file the Status Report.
This was necessitated on account of the alleged offer by JHALCO by way of advertisements on 27.3.2003 and 31.7.2003.
The statement was obviously an incorrect one because the absorption of 302 employees was obviously number done in pursuance of the Courts Order dated 13.1.2005.
Learned companynsel states that order of absorption had been passed despite the fact that 158 people have been found to be surplus.
Further, the rejoinder affidavit filed by the State of Jharkhand dated 28.4.2005, showing the inability to absorb the remaining BHALCO employees was also referred to.
Paragraph 8 a and 8 b of this additional affidavit suggested that JHALCO had adopted the rules and regulations of BHALCO, and that JHALCO will receive assistance from financial institutions.
8 and 11.
On 11.9.2006, another order came to be passed on I.A. number.
It seems that after the Order dated 13.1.2005, as many as 216 applications were filed by the erstwhile BHALCO employees.
A. number 8 A. number 8 for intervention is dismissed as number pressed.
In this view of the matter learned companynsel submits that those who had number turned up for their absorption within the aforementioned period may number be directed to be absorbed pursuant to this Courts Order dated 13.1.2005.
The affidavit then goes on giving certain chronology of events, showing as to how JHALCO was brought under the existence.
The matter was adjourned from time to time, thereafter.
The affidavit once again stated about the erstwhile absorption of 302 employees, and further that as on date, 216 employees were left with BHALCO who had number so far been absorbed.
In short, the stand was taken that JHALCO has numberhing to do with BHALCO and it companyld number be treated as a successor of JHALCO.
398 applications were filed out of which 302 were found eligible and those applicants were absorbed.
The State filed an additional affidavit.
For the aforementioned purposes a companymittee number companysisting of more than three members chaired by a retired High Court Judge or a sitting District Judge may be appointed who may scrutinize the assets and liabilities of the companypanies and submit a report to the High Court as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months from the date of companystitution of the Committee.
S. SIRPURKAR, J. In the instant Application, the petitioner seeks directions from this Court on the following Direct the respondent State JHALCO to immediately companyply with the Order dated 13.1.2005 and pass the Order of absorption in JHALCO with respect to 213 employees listed in the letters issued by MD, JHALCO on various dates annexed to the I.A. , pursuant to the Order dated 13.1.2005 leaving the employees who have died.
