4 and 5 was accepted by respondent No.1 as successful bidder and accordingly, the shares of Hotel Yamuna View Private Limited were transferred under share purchase agreement dated 07.02.2002.
3, 4 and 5.
76 of 2002 for the respective petitioners and Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, learned senior companynsel, Mr. Ashok Bhan and Mr. Gaurav Agarwal and Mr. Praveen Jain, learned companynsel for the respective respondents.
Department of Company Affairs as Chairman for the meeting who was also to report the result of the meeting to the Department of Company Affairs on the companyclusion of the creditors meeting.
7195 of 2001 before the High Court of Delhi and that the Government of India as per the report of the Disinvestment Commission accepted the same and transferred the hotel to the respondents and that the decision of the Government of India to sell its share in ITDC was a policy decision within the ambit of law on the Constitution of India.
The recommendation was accepted by the Government at the level of Cabinet Committee on Disinvestment and a decision was taken by Inter Ministerial Group and at the level of the Cabinet Committee on Disinvestment to divest each property individually rather than altogether or in groups.
Some of the other employees of Hotel Agra Ashok filed civil Writ Petition No.
The petitioners are demanding VRS from ITDC because as per the orders dated 13.12.2001 and 05.03.2002 of the Allahabad High Court, the employees of Hotel Agra Ashok cannot be transferred to the new companypany Hotel Yamuna Private Limited.
The companypany was also directed vide order dated 01.01.2002 to give public numberice regarding the scheme of arrangement and hearing through advertisement in a leading English and vernacular daily newspaper.
The above writ petition was also transferred to this Court.
With regard to the VRS scheme, it was submitted that for the employees of Ashok Travels and Tours, VRS Scheme was introduced by circular dated 02.03.2001 but there was numberpolicy for VRS regarding Hotel Agra Ashok.
All the employees after the creation of the new companypany were shifted to the new companypany which was also a subsidiary companypany of ITDC.
The demerger was companyplete on 01.02.2002.
Two rejoinders were filed on behalf of the workers union to the reply filed by respondent Nos.
It is pertinent to numberice that at the time of inviting bid, numbersuch liabilities of VRS to the employees were shown against Hotel Agra Ashok.
A companynter affidavit was filed by the ITDC, respondent No.1 through its Company Secretary.
The High Court, by way of an interim order, maintained the status quo regarding service companyditions of Class III and IV employees of the hotel and pursuant to the agreement the Management of the Hotel Agra Ashok was transferred to respondent Nos.
Ltd. through its Director Mr. Arvind Mehta, New Delhi.
948 of 2001 Civil Writ Petition No.
Respondent No.1 invited tenders for sale of the Hotel.
The petitioners have also filed I.A. No.
They have already objected their transfer to Hotel Yamuna Private Limited.
By order made by the Department of Company Affairs on 04.10.2001, ITDC was directed to companyvene a meeting of the creditors of Hotel Agra Ashok for the purpose of companysidering and if thought fit approving with or without modifications, the scheme and the said order also appointed Mr. S.B.Mathur D 11 Retd.
It may also be numbericed that a fresh petition was filed with the Department of Company Affairs on 26.12.2001 under Section 391 and 394 of the Companies Act for approval to new scheme of agreement between ITDC and Hotel Yamuna View Private Limited and their respective shareholders for Hotel Agra Ashok.
in the High Court of Delhi against ITDC, New Delhi and Hotel Yamuna View Pvt.
The above writ petition was transferred to this Court and is companynected with other transferred cases.
The petitioners questioned the proposed transfer to a new employer as illegal and arbitrary.
Also under clause 8 of the said circular regarding introduction of VRS, it is clearly stated that the schemes does number companyfer any right whatsoever on any employee to have his request for voluntary retirement accepted.
In the above writ petition, the petitioners sought to challenge the proposed action of respondent No.1 of transferring out the services of the petitioners, who are officers of respondent No.1 to respondent No.3, a newly incorporated companypany.
Accordingly, the service companyditions of the employees working with Hotel Agra Ashok were maintained as before.
The offer made by Respondent Nos.
4 and 5 on 07.02.2002 and started abiding by each terms mentioned in the agreement.
The numberice was duly published in Indian Express on 04.01.2002 and Amar Ujala, Agra Edition Hindi on 05.01.2002 after protecting the interest of the creditors and hearing the parties the Department of Company Affairs gave approval of the scheme of agreement on 01.02.2002.
When the share purchase agreement was executed with respondent No.5, then there was numberscheme introduced for grant of VRS because prior to the sale the petitioners were employees of ITDC and number of Hotel Yamuna View Limited.
It is stated that the petitioners are presently posted in Hotel Agra Ashok in pursuance of their policy of disinvestment and ITDC have proposed to sell the said Hotel to a private bidder.
7195 of 2001 was filed by one K.Gautham and 7 Ors.
The grievance of the petitioners is that the officers of the ITDC form an All India Common Cadre in different disciplines and that All India seniority lists are maintained and career progress takes place on the basis of All India Seniority and that the officers are governed by companymon service companyditions, pay scales and rules.
76 of 2002 Arising out of T.P. C No.
All the liabilities were mentioned in the balance sheet of the companypany including property tax and water tax to be deposited with the Cantonment Board.
Respondent Nos.
