Writ petition against company in liquidation is non-maintainable without leave of the Company Court.

The petitioner, an employee of the Bihar State Small Industries Corporation Ltd. (a company in liquidation), filed a writ petition seeking payment of outstanding dues

The Official Liquidator (O.L.) had previously adjudicated the petitioner’s claim, admitting only Rs. 1,68,093/- and rejecting the remaining claim of Rs. 15,88,124/-

The petitioner argued that he was in extreme financial distress due to ailment and cited a Supreme Court direction in WP(c) No. 932 of 2022 regarding the liability of the State to clear employee dues

Respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition given the ongoing liquidation proceedings

1. Whether a writ petition is maintainable against a company in liquidation without the leave of the Company Court in view of the statutory bar under the Companies Act

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to direct relief from the Writ Court for rejected claims when a statutory remedy of appeal before the Company Court exists

Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 (erroneously cited as Section 466 in the judgment), which mandates that once a winding-up order is passed or an Official Liquidator is appointed, no suit or legal proceeding shall commence or proceed against the company except by leave of the Company Court

The principle of "Pro rata" distribution of assets to creditors/employees during liquidation

The availability of a statutory appeal against the Official Liquidator’s decision before the Company Court

The Court observed that since the respondent corporation is currently under liquidation (Company Petition No. 05 of 1999), the statutory framework of the Companies Act governs all claims against it

The Court found that the petitioner’s claim had already been processed by the Official Liquidator, who admitted a partial amount and paid it on a pro rata basis

The Court reasoned that the petitioner had a specific legal remedy to challenge the rejection of the remainder of his claim by filing an appeal before the Company Court

Consequently, despite the petitioner's plea of financial hardship and references to Supreme Court directions in other cases, the Court held it could not bypass the jurisdiction of the Company Court where the liquidation is pending

The petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the Official Liquidator’s order before the Company Court

The Court further directed that if the petitioner files an appeal along with a condonation of delay application explaining the time spent pursuing this writ, the Company Court shall consider it in accordance with law