( 1 ) ). IN this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, three public Financial Institutions, viz. ICICI Ltd. , Industrial Development Bank of India and IFCI Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ICICI, IDBI and IFCI respectively or as "public financial institutions") have challenged the notification dated 22. 10. 1999 (annexure "c") issued by the State of Gujarat under the provisions of Bombay Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "bru Act") in favour of respondent No. 2-Gujarat Telephone Cables Ltd, a public limited company. The petitioners have also prayed for a writ to restrain the State Government from issuing any fresh notification in favour of respondent No. 2-Company or renewing the notification issued under BRU Act in favour of respondent No. 2.

( 2 ) THE petitioners are public financial institutions which had advanced loans to respondent No. 2-Gujarat Telephone Cables Ltd (hereinafter referred to as "the respondent Company" or "the Company" ). The petitioners had advanced loans in various categories to the respondent Company as per the statements at Annexures A and B respectively. The particulars of advances, outstandings and arrears as in April/may 2000 are as under :- @@@ Advances Outstan- Arrears Dues as dings on (Rupees in lacs) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1. ICICI 8557 5096 2979 15. 04. 2000 2. IDBI 700 1206 1206 01. 04. 2000 3. IFCI 111 101 101 11. 05. 2000 Total 6403 4286 -

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the petitioners, the respondent-Company committed breach of loan agreements and failed to: (A) furnish periodical information/reports on its financial performance, monthly cash flows and other informations requested by the petitioners from time to time. (B) appoint representative of petitioner No. 1 as nominee Director on the Board of the Company. (C) issue Equity Shares of the Company consequent to the notice of conversion issued by petitioner No. 1.

( 4 ) BEING dissatisfied with the conduct of the Company, the ICICI by their without prejudice notice dated 15. 3. 2000 called upon the Company to convert whole of the outstanding amount of the loan of Rs. 500 lacs and part of the debenture facility to the extent of Rs. 2000 lacs (amounting to Rs. 222. 2 lacs) into fully paid up equity shares of Rs. 10 each at par as on 31. 3. 2000 in terms of relevant agreements. By letter dated 21. 3. 2000 the Company through its advocate denied the contents of the letter and informed the ICICI Ltd. that the respondent Company had been declared by the State Govt as a relief undertaking under BRU Act for a period of 12 months from 22. 10. 1999. The petitioners therefore through advocate sent notice dated 12. 6. 2000 to the State Government in the Labour and Employment department, Industries and Mines Department and Finance Department calling upon the heads of the said departments to furnish various particulars, interalia, whether the State Govt had given any loan guarantee or any other financial assistance to the respondent company, whether the respondent-Company had disclosed to the State Government the various loan agreements and commitments made by it to the petitioner institutions and also as to what was the basis on which the Government had purported to reach satisfaction under section 3 of the BRU Act. Thereafter, the petitioners filed the present petition on 3rd July 2000. During pendency of the petition, the State Government issued another notification dated 6. 10. 2000 extending the protection under the BRU Act in favour of the respondent Company for a further period of 12 months from 22. 10. 2000. The petition is heard and disposed of as containing challenge to the said renewal notification dated 6. 10. 2000 as well.

( 5 ) CONTENTIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONERS At the hearing of this petition, the learned counsel for the petitioners have raised the following contentions:5. 1 the State Government had no a