JUDGMENT :

R.D. Kothari, J.

In the present case, the scheme framed by BIFR failed to revive the sick unit and also failed to satisfy the said unit's creditors. Appellant is one of the creditor. Nice questions of applicability of scheme - on the handy plea of natural justice - and usual question of principle of statutory construction do not solve the problem. Appellant's dues are locked since so many years and respondent - auction purchaser of the said unit is inter-alia praying for electricity connection. Going through the record gives impression that hotly debated issues before the Court alleviate the problems of the parties only partly. Where lay the solution? Leaving that for the parties to search for the answer, case presented by learned advocates for the parties is considered.

2. Facts are, thus;

One Navsari Cotton and Silk Mills Ltd. (for short "NCSML") was established in 1936. It appears that HT electric connection was granted to it by respondent in 1955 then was known as GEB. In its good days, it was producing 50,000 mtrs. (yarn) per day. About 2000 workers were working in the Mill. Presumably, its working was normal till it became 'sick'. It became sick in 1989. Reference was made to BIFR in 1990. Rehabilitation scheme was sanctioned in 1991. IDBI; was appointed as Operating Agency (OA). The scheme was to complete by March,1992. It could not be completed even after 4 years. Company's 'financial condition deteriorated'. Meanwhile, the company also stopped its operation in July,1994. In its meeting held in the month of October,1994, BIFR observed that sanctioned Rehabilitation scheme has failed. It directed IDBI/OA to advertise for take over/merger/OTS since promoters were not able to bring in additional fund to revive the unit. An advertisement in this regard was issued in December,1994 but no viable proposal came forward. BIFR, in its meeting held on 15.6.1995, formed prima facie opinion that company is required to be wound up. At this stage, workers of the Mill took initiative and they came in picture. They formed co-operative society called 'The Morarji Desai Textile Labour Co-operative Industries Ltd." (for short 'MDTLCIL"). They submitted rehabilitation proposal. BIFR, in its meeting held on 15.3.1996, directed OA to consider the proposal submitted by the workers' cooperative society. Rehabilitation scheme with some modification was approved by BIFR in its meeting held on 14.10.1996. Under the scheme, 1400 workers were to be retrenched and 600 workers were to be retained. The scheme was sanctioned on 5.12.1996. It appears that MDTLCIL took over the management of the company in January,1997 and Mill started its operation in April,1997.

Again, draft Rehabilitation scheme was introduced. It was at the instance of MDTLCIL. One Major proposal was to sell the land of the Mill and to pay the debts of the Mill. BIFR directed disposal of the surplus land. The Asset Sale Committee was constituted, the said committee had nominees of IDBI, other banks, one Sub-Divisional Revenue Officer nominated by the Collector etc. Fairly big area of open land i.e. 11 lacs sq. ft. was put in auction. M/s.Amardeep Association Navsari (AAN) - respondent No.1 - had placed a bid at Rs.47/- per sq. ft. In the meeting, AAN had acceded to the request of the Authority and price of the land was fixed at Rs.51/- per sq. ft. AAN had purchased the land at Rs.561/- lacs. It was on 29.5.2003.

It appears that on 1.12.2004, AAN had applied for electric connection. The GEB/DGVCL did not grant the reconnection mainly on the ground that there is a huge outstanding amount of electricity of the Mill. On 14.5.2006, AAN moved BIFR for this purpose. It appears that BIFR had directed to release the power connection to the respondent No.1. Thereafter, respondent No.1 had filed SCA No.21824 of 2006 against the GEB/DGVCL for suitable direction about power connection. It was filed on 11.10.2006. The said writ petition came to be allowed on 14.6.2010. Present LPA arises fro