JUDGMENT

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.(Oral)

1. Rule DB.

2. Learned counsels for the respondents accept notice.

3. At request of learned counsels for the parties and keeping in view the directions passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 27.11.2009, these petitions are taken up for final disposal.

4. There are two writ petitions filed aggrieved by the same order of the AAIFR dated 18.9.2009 and of the BIFR dated 24.10.2008 - one by the company in respect of which proceedings are pending and the other petition by a strategic investor in the company.

5. M/s. Raam Tyres Limited (for short 'RTL'), one of the petitioners has been before the BIFR Board from 1997 onwards. The endeavours to revive the company were proving to be fruitless and thus it was agreed to change the Management for which an advertisement was issued on 2.8.2006. M/s. Pelican Rubber Private Limited, respondent No.2, the only contesting party in the present petition, submitted its proposal. There were two separate proposals submitted by said respondent No.2 - one envisaged a complete takeover of the Management; the other with the participative Management of the existing Management. The first proposal was withdraw