State of U.P. and Another v. Party

the State, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the material on record.

2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated

12.10.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Act (V.B.U.P.S.E.B.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, in Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 2012 by which the appeal of the revisionist filed against the order dated 19.07.2011 passed by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut has been dismissed.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the revisionist that, initially learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Act (V.B.U.P.S.E.B.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, granted an interim order against vacating the house of the employee, revisionist herein, and finally the appeal was dismissed. Learned counsel for the revisionist has relied upon Standing Orders In Vacuum Pan Sugar Factories in U.P. and laid emphasis on Para No. 9 which reads as under:- "If the termination of a workman's service is the subject-matter of an industrial dispute he shall be allowed to live in the factory quarter 2 CRLR No. 2379 of 2024 allotted to him till the dispute is finally decided."

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that so far as this standing order is concerned the same is in contravention of Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 which reads as under:- "630. Penalty for wrongful withholding of property .- (1) If any officer or employee of a company- (a)wrongfully obtains possession of any property of a company; or (b)having any such property in his possession, wrongfully withholds it or knowingly applies it to purposes other than those expressed or directed in the articles and authorised by this Act, he shall, on the complaint of the company or any creditor or contributory thereof, be punishable with fine which may extend to [ten thousand rupees]. (2)The Court trying the offence may also order such officer or employee to deliver up or refund, within a time to be fixed by the Court, any such property wrongfully obtained or wrongfully withheld or knowingly misapplied, or in default, to suffer imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years."

5. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that until and unless the (Para No. 9) Standing Orders is complied with, no action whatsoever pursuant to Section 630 of Sub Clause (2) of the Companies Act, 1956, can be taken against the revisionist and therefore, the order passed by learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Act (V.B.U.P.S.E.B.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, and learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut is liable to be quashed and set aside.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that even reading the Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 and further reading and relying upon (Para No. 9) of the standing procedure as above, even it is presumed that, nothing was adverse the employee and he has superannuated in normal circumstances and after attaining employee age of 58 years (now 60 years) he is under obligation and now he is of the age of 64 years, hence under an obligation to vacate the premises of the company accommodation retained by him and laid emphasis on Clause (LL) (Para No. 9) of Standing Orders In Vacuum Pan Sugar Factories in U.P. which reads as 3 CRLR No. 2379 of 2024 under:- "Retirement of workman on reaching the age of superannuation

1. A workman may be retire from service on reaching the age of superannuation which shall be 58 years.

2. The Provident Fund record of the factory specifying the workman's age would to begin with, be taken as the reliable record of the age of a workman for purposes of retirement.

3. This record of age will stand modified as may be warranted by the following: (a) Date of birth as given in the school leaving certificate or the High School Certificate. (b) Date of birth as certified by a Municipal Board, a Cantonment Board, a Notified Area or a Town Area Committee. (c) An insurance policy taken before November 1, 1960. (d) Junior High School (VIII Class) Certificate (to be applicable in the case of future entrants only): Provided that- (i) Where the date, month and the year of birth of a workman are recorded in Provident Fund records, the date of birth as given in the Provident Fund records, shall be taken as final; (ii) Where only the month and year of birth are given the date will 1 taken as the first of the month; and (iii) Where the Provident Fund record of the workman does not spec the date or month of birth in that case the 1st November of the year shall be deemed to be the date of retirement."

7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has further submitted that, even if, the matter is under dispute before the learned Labour Court, the same will not affect, as far as Clause (LL) (Para No. 9) of the said Standing Orders is concerned.

8. Having regard to the rival contentions made by learned counsel for the parties, and without going into other merits of the case, since the employee has already superannuated four years back and now he is about 64 years old, it was incumbent upon the employee/revisionist to vacate the premises and hand over the peaceful possession to the company, as further employees are waiting in que, to seek appropriate accommodation from the company.

9. Hence, without going into merits and other contentions, the 4 CRLR No. 2379 of 2024 matter is sub-judice before the learned Labour Court, it is directed that the revisionist herein has attained the age of 58 years of service and superannuated four years back, he was under obligation to vacate the said premises, but not doing so, the employee/revisionist herein has violated the standing orders, those have been now relied by the revisionist herein. It may also be noted that the relationship between the revisionist and opposite party no. 2 i.e. employee-employer ceases to operate.

10. It is directed that the revisionist shall vacate the said accommodation within a period of two months from today, and opposite party no. 2 shall be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law, against the revisionist, if so advised.

11. With the aforesaid direction the revision is disposed of. September 23, 2025 Vikram (Harvir Singh,J.) VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

the State, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the material on record.

2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated

12.10.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Act (V.B.U.P.S.E.B.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, in Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 2012 by which the appeal of the revisionist filed against the order dated 19.07.2011 passed by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut has been dismissed.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the revisionist that, initially learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Act (V.B.U.P.S.E.B.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, granted an interim order against vacating the house of the employee, revisionist herein, and finally the appeal was dismissed. Learned counsel for the revisionist has relied upon Standing Orders In Vacuum Pan Sugar Factories in U.P. and laid emphasis on Para No. 9 which reads as under:- "If the termination of a workman's service is the subject-matter of an industrial dispute he shall be allowed to live in the factory quarter 2 CRLR No. 2379 of 2024 allotted to him till the dispute is finally decided."

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that so far as this standing order is concerned the same is in contravention of Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 which reads as under:- "630. Penalty for wrongful withholding of property .- (1) If any officer or employee of a company- (a)wrongfully obtains possession of any property of a company; or (b)having any such property in his possession, wrongfully withholds it or knowingly applies it to purposes other than those expressed or directed in the articles and authorised by this Act, he shall, on the complaint of the company or any creditor or contributory thereof, be punishable with fine which may extend to [ten thousand rupees]. (2)The Court trying the offence may also order such officer or employee to deliver up or refund, within a time to be fixed by the Court, any such property wrongfully obtained or wrongfully withheld or knowingly misapplied, or in default, to suffer imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years."

5. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that until and unless the (Para No. 9) Standing Orders is complied with, no action whatsoever pursuant to Section 630 of Sub Clause (2) of the Companies Act, 1956, can be taken against the revisionist and therefore, the order passed by learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Act (V.B.U.P.S.E.B.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, and learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut is liable to be quashed and set aside.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that even reading the Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 and further reading and relying upon (Para No. 9) of the standing procedure as above, even it is presumed that, nothing was adverse the employee and he has superannuated in normal circumstances and after attaining employee age of 58 years (now 60 years) he is under obligation and now he is of the age of 64 years, hence under an obligation to vacate the premises of the company accommodation retained by him and laid emphasis on Clause (LL) (Para No. 9) of Standing Orders In Vacuum Pan Sugar Factories in U.P. which reads as 3 CRLR No. 2379 of 2024 under:- "Retirement of workman on reaching the age of superannuation

1. A workman may be retire from service on reaching the age of superannuation which shall be 58 years.

2. The Provident Fund record of the factory specifying the workman's age would to begin with, be taken as the reliable record of the age of a workman for purposes of retirement.

3. This record of age will stand modified as may be warranted by the following: (a) Date of birth as given in the school leaving certificate or the High School Certificate. (b) Date of birth as certified by a Municipal Board, a Cantonment Board, a Notified Area or a Town Area Committee. (c) An insurance policy taken before November 1, 1960. (d) Junior High School (VIII Class) Certificate (to be applicable in the case of future entrants only): Provided that- (i) Where the date, month and the year of birth of a workman are recorded in Provident Fund records, the date of birth as given in the Provident Fund records, shall be taken as final; (ii) Where only the month and year of birth are given the date will 1 taken as the first of the month; and (iii) Where the Provident Fund record of the workman does not spec the date or month of birth in that case the 1st November of the year shall be deemed to be the date of retirement."

7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has further submitted that, even if, the matter is under dispute before the learned Labour Court, the same will not affect, as far as Clause (LL) (Para No. 9) of the said Standing Orders is concerned.

8. Having regard to the rival contentions made by learned counsel for the parties, and without going into other merits of the case, since the employee has already superannuated four years back and now he is about 64 years old, it was incumbent upon the employee/revisionist to vacate the premises and hand over the peaceful possession to the company, as further employees are waiting in que, to seek appropriate accommodation from the company.

9. Hence, without going into merits and other contentions, the 4 CRLR No. 2379 of 2024 matter is sub-judice before the learned Labour Court, it is directed that the revisionist herein has attained the age of 58 years of service and superannuated four years back, he was under obligation to vacate the said premises, but not doing so, the employee/revisionist herein has violated the standing orders, those have been now relied by the revisionist herein. It may also be noted that the relationship between the revisionist and opposite party no. 2 i.e. employee-employer ceases to operate.

10. It is directed that the revisionist shall vacate the said accommodation within a period of two months from today, and opposite party no. 2 shall be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law, against the revisionist, if so advised.

11. With the aforesaid direction the revision is disposed of. September 23, 2025 Vikram (Harvir Singh,J.) VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad