Karnataka High Court
Ngef Ex-Employees Welfare Association ... vs Government Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:36980-DB
OSA No. 23 of 2017
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORIGINAL SIDE APPEAL NO. 23 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
NGEF EX-EMPLOYEES
WELFARE ASSOCIATION (R)
FLAT NO.302
SAI SHANKARI RESIDENCY
NO.2011, 20TH MAIN
J.P.NAGAR 2ND PHASE
BENGALURU-560078
REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL SECRETARY
SHRI KRISHNA URS
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed (BY SRI ADITYA SONDHI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
by VASANTHA SRI H P GANGESH GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
KUMARY B K
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AND:
KARNATAKA
1. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
SECRETARIAT
VIDHAN SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560001
REPRESENTED BY
KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL
AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION (KSIIDC)
KHANIJA BHAVAN, 49
4TH FLOOR
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:36980-DB
OSA No. 23 of 2017
HC-KAR
EAST WING
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560001
2. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF
NGEF LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
ATTACHED TO THE
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
"CORPORATE BHAVAN"
NO.26-27, 12TH FLOOR
RAHEJA TOWERS
M.G.ROAD
BENGALURU-560001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SAJI P. JOHN & SMT. B. RAJASHREE, ADVOCATES FOR R-1;
SRI K.S. MAHADEVAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS OSA IS FILED U/S 483 OF THE COMPANIES ACT,
1956 R/W RULES 6 AND 9 OF THE COMPANIES (COURT)
RULES, 1959 R/W SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
22.06.2017 MADE IN COMPANY APPLICATION NO.184/2015 IN
CO.P.NO.154/2002 AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS TO MEET
THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC.
THIS OSA, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:36980-DB
OSA No. 23 of 2017
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. SINGH)
This Original Side Appeal has been filed impugning the
order dated 22.06.2017 passed by the learned Company Judge
in Company Application No.184/2015 in Company Petition
No.154/2002.
2. The respondent-Company is 100% Government owned
undertaking and therefore, it is a Government Company. 9.72%
shareholding held by Elektoholding GmbH company was also
bought over by the Government. It is the further case of the
respondent-Company that all the dues of the secured/unsecured
creditors have been settled and therefore, the State Government
filed an application in Company Application No.184/2015 for
staying the winding up proceedings to revive the Company in
public interest, which was granted. This order of stay has been
challenged before this Court by the appellant-Association of the
erstwhile employees of the respondent-Company, who had
NC: 2025:KHC:36980-DB
HC-KAR
taken voluntary retirement way back in 2002 pursuant to the
Voluntary Retirement Scheme.
3. Sri Aditya Sondhi, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by
Sri H.P. Gangesh Gowda, learned counsel for the appellant
submits that the members of the appellant-Association have
certain dues regarding the payment of ex gratia of 5% and some
other dues which have remained unpaid and therefore, staying
the winding up proceedings by the impugned order is against the
interest of the members of the appellant-Association. He further
submits that the impugned order is also against the judgment of
the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.6061-6063/2008 dated
25.09.2008.
4. Sri Saji P. John, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent-Company, however, submits that the respondent-
Company is a wholly owned Government Company and public
interest demands that the Company should be revived.
Therefore, the Government has taken a conscious decision to
revive the Company inasmuch as 100% shareholding is of the
Government. He, therefore, submits that there is nothing illegal
in the impugned order passed by the learned Company Judge
NC: 2025:KHC:36980-DB
HC-KAR
staying the winding up proceedings when most of the dues of the
secured/unsecured creditors have been cleared. He further
submits that if the appellant-Association thinks or is of the
opinion that some of its dues have not been paid in terms of the
VRS Scheme of 2002, they should move an application before
the learned Company Judge quantifying their dues for
adjudication by the learned Company Judge, and the learned
Company Judge, after hearing the parties, may pass appropriate
direction which shall be implemented by the respondent-
Company. He further submits that he will not raise any
preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of such
application if it is filed by the appellant-Association. However,
whether such an application after the members of the petitioner-
Association taken voluntary retirement in 2002 would arise for
consideration needs to be considered by the learned Company
Judge.
5. We have considered the submissions advanced at the Bar.
We are of the considered view that the decision to revive the
Company is in public interest which has been taken by the
Government. The question of payment of admissible dues in
NC: 2025:KHC:36980-DB
HC-KAR
terms of the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2002 in law shall be
adjudicated by the learned Company Judge if an appropriate
application is filed by the appellant-Association quantifying its
dues.
6. We, therefore, dispose of this appeal permitting the
appellant-Association to file an appropriate application regarding
its claim of the unpaid dues, if any, in implementation of the
Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2002. We request the learned
Company Judge to adjudicate the claim of the appellant-
Association after giving due notice to the respondent-Company
and decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law.
7. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of
the interim order at this stage.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
