IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.31554 of 2014 BETWEEN The District Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd., Adilaba AND ... PETITIONER The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioner states that it is a cooperative society and it has recoveries amounting to a sum of Rs.49,55,540/- on account of the sale of cotton bails supplied by the petitioner’s society to respondent No.4. Alleging that respondent No.5 is not considering the claim of the petitioner and seeking recovery of the said amount petitioner has made a representation to the Principal Secretary to the Government, Public Enterprises Department, dated 30.03.2013. Questioning inaction, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Learned Government Pleader, who appears on behalf of all the respondents including the Liquidator, has placed before the court copy of the proceedings of the Principal Secretary to the Government in Letter No.7995/Tex.1/2013, dated 17.04.2014, addressed to the Business Manager of the petitioner-Society. The said letter states that the Principal Secretary called the Liquidator to ascertain the feasibility of making payment to the petitioner and as per the information available with the Principal Secretary, it was found that an amount of Rs.547.98 lakhs were available with the Liquidator after realizing the assets of the Adilabad Cotton Growers Cooperative Spinning Mill. It is stated that the said amount was fully utilized for discharging various liabilities to the employees, financial institutions, sales tax, and other creditors and for payment of defunct mill employees towards VRS etc. As on today, it appears that the Liquidator has yet to settle the claims of other parties to a tune of Rs.10.86 crores.
4. It is evident from the averments of the petitioner that he has not preferred any claim petition before the Liquidator and has only made requests. Hence, in my view, it is essential that the petitioner has to first make a detailed claim before the Liquidator and as and when there is any availability of funds, the Liquidator shall take steps to distribute the assets prorata among the left over creditors. As and when such a claim is preferred by the petitioner, the Liquidator will examine the same and pass appropriate orders thereon preferably within three months.
Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J November 13, 2014 LMV