Supreme Court Appoints Former Madras HC CJ As Administrator To Clear Jaiput Udyog Ltd Workers' Dues

In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 15) appointed former Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava as Court Administrator to verify and oversee the long-pending issue of unpaid dues along with PF claims of thousands of workers of Jaipur Udyog Ltd. (JUL), directing completion of the exercise by August 31, 2026. “An exercise be carried out in a time bound manner for verification of dues of the workmen in order to clear that liability within a period of four months…Needful be done finally by 31.08.2026.”, the court ordered. A bench of Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Vijay Bishnoi held that the worker's dues can be settled from the proceeds of money out of the sale of the properties of JAL and its subsidiary M/s Jai Agro Industries Ltd. (JAIL). The Court further clarified that before any action is taken for disposal or use of the assets, "its proper valuation has to be made after finding the status thereof." “For the purpose of payment of dues to the workmen and, reimbursement of the amount spent or invested by GDCL, some of the properties of JUL/JAIL may have to be sold. After the process of identification of the properties and its valuation is complete and report is before this Court, the issue will be decided as to how and which of the properties need to be sold.”, the court said. These directions were issued while hearing the writ petition filed by Uttar Pradesh Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh, where the Court declined their plea to revive JUL's cement unit in Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan, and its jute mill in Kanpur, holding that revival was no longer feasible after nearly four decades of closure, while ensuring that the workers receive their long-pending dues. Background The case traces back to 1987, when Jaipur Udyog Ltd. was declared a sick company under the Sick Industrial Companies Act. A rehabilitation scheme was approved in 1992, under which Gannon Dunkerley & Co. Ltd. (GDCL) took over management and was required to revive the company. However, the revival failed. By 2000, the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) recommended winding up of the company due to continued losses, closure of operations, and failure of the promoter to meet its financial commitments. Later, with the repeal of the Sick Industrial Companies Act and the introduction of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the proceedings abated. The Supreme Court noted that neither JUL nor GDCL approached the National Company Law Tribunal within the permitted time, resulting in the revival of the winding-up recommendation. The dispute before the Court primarily concerned payment of wages and benefits to workers who had remained unpaid for decades. An earlier award had already laid down principles for calculating dues. A mediation report placed the estimated dues of workers of the Sawai Madhopur unit at around ₹115 crores, apart from interest and provident fund liabilities. Despite this, payments remained incomplete, especially for workers of the cement unit, prompting the Court to pass an order stating that “the matter cannot be kept pending for infinity for that purpose.” “…exercise is being done since 02.09.2021 by appointment of Court Commissioners with representation of the workers union as well as GDCL. Substantial amount has been paid as well. Whatever amount remains, for that, exercise has to be carried out in a time bound manner as the matter cannot be kept pending for infinity for that purpose. Simultaneously, the provident fund dues of the workmen also need to be calculated for which Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Rajasthan may have to be looped in.”, the court observed. Also, the Court ordered the workers living in possession of the company's accommodation to vacate the same within six months from the date of receiving the pending dues. Cause Title: BHARTIYA MAZDOOR SANGH, U.P. & ANR. VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & OTHERSCitation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 373Click here to download judgmentAppearance: For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gopal Sankaranayanan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Krishnan Venu Gopal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Barun Kumar Sinha, Adv. Mrs. Pratibha Sinha, Adv. Mr. Sneh Vardhan, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Mudgal, Adv. Ms. Nandini Kaushik, Adv. For Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Nalin T., Adv. Mr. Sameer Rohtagi, Adv. Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv. Ms. Hetvi Patel, Adv. For Mr. Satya Mitra, AOR Mr. Nikhil Goel, Sr.Adv. Ms. Megha Karnwal, AOR Mr. Aaditya T., Adv. Mr. M. Bajpai, Adv. Ms. Awanitika, Adv. Ms. Riddhi Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Arun K. Sinha, AOR Mr. Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary, AOR Ms. Tulika Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Beenu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Venkat Narayan, Adv. Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR Ms. Sonali Gaur, Adv. Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, AOR Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Grover, Adv. Mr. Vishal Singh, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Thapa, Adv. Ms. Kritika Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Megha Dugar, Adv....

Supreme Court Appoints Former Madras HC CJ As Administrator To Clear Jaiput Udyog Ltd Workers' Dues

Yash Mittal

Tags