The case involves writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the validity of Section 327(7) of the Companies Act, 2013, and seeking directions to exclude workmen's dues from the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The petitioners argue that Clause 19(a) of the Eleventh Schedule of the IBC, which inserts sub-section (7) in Section 327 of the Companies Act, 2013, is unreasonable and violates Article 14 of the Constitution. They also contend that Section 53(1)(b)(i) of the IBC unfairly limits workmen's dues to 24 months preceding the liquidation order and ranks them equally with secured creditors.
Moser Baer Karamchari Union filed a writ petition challenging Section 327(7) of the Companies Act, 2013, and seeking exclusion of workmen's dues from the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the IBC. Other writ petitions (Manoj Kumar Nagar and Raj Kumar Verma) challenged Clause 19(a) of the Eleventh Schedule of the IBC, arguing it violates Article 14 of the Constitution. The petitioners contended that Section 53(1)(b)(i) of the IBC unfairly limits workmen's dues to 24 months preceding the liquidation order and ranks them equally with secured creditors. The Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee (BLRC) recommended a waterfall mechanism different from the Companies Act, capping workmen's dues at 3 months with pari passu priority with secured creditors. The Joint Committee
…Sign in to view the parties.
Moser Baer Karamchari Union filed a writ…
Manoj Kumar Nagar filed a writ petition…
The case involves writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the validity of Section 327(7) of the Companies Act, 2013, and seeking directions to exclude workmen's dues from the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The petitioners argue that Clause 19(a) of the Eleventh Schedule of the IBC, which inserts sub-section (7) in Section 327 of the Companies Act, 2013, is unreasonable and violates Article 14 of the Constitution. They also contend that Section 53(1)(b)(i) of the IBC unfairly limits workmen's dues to 24 months preceding the liquidation order and ranks them equally with secured creditors.
Moser Baer Karamchari Union filed a writ petition challenging Section 327(7) of the Companies Act, 2013, and seeking exclusion of workmen's dues from the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the IBC. Other writ petitions (Manoj Kumar Nagar and Raj Kumar Verma) challenged Clause 19(a) of the Eleventh Schedule of the IBC, arguing it violates Article 14 of the Constitution. The petitioners contended that Section 53(1)(b)(i) of the IBC unfairly limits workmen's dues to 24 months preceding the liquidation order and ranks them equally with secured creditors. The Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee (BLRC) recommended a waterfall mechanism different from the Companies Act, capping workmen's dues at 3 months with pari passu priority with secured creditors. The Joint Committee
…Moser Baer Karamchari Union filed a writ…
Manoj Kumar Nagar filed a writ petition…