The petitioners are before this Court claiming release of amounts in a fixed deposit, which remains unpaid even after the same has expired. The petitioner has agitated the claim before various authorities. The Government, before the statutory authorities and before this Court, merely asserts that a revival program is in the anvil, but, nothing has happened till now. The petitioners are still left without being paid the amounts dues to them. 2. In such circumstance, the 2nd respondent would look into the affairs of the first respondent and if within a reasonable time revival is not proceeded with, at least the 2nd respondent would look at whether winding up proceedings can be initiated against the first respondent. The same would have to be done in a phased manner. But for the above directions, no positive direction to re-pay the amounts can be made in W.P.(C) No. 15225 of 2013 (C) 2 the above writ petition. Admittedly, the first respondent does not have any funds as of now. However, the petitioners would have their remedies to proceed against the assets of the first respondent if any, or as against the amounts recovered from the Board of Directors by way of surcharge proceedings. Leaving such remedies open, the writ petition is disposed of.
3. If any alternate remedy is availed of, the period in which this writ petition was pending before this Court i.e., from 14.06.2013 till today, shall not be taken for computation for limitation, under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
AMV/28/11/ sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE