The court also suggested that the company pay wages for at least two months to its workers who have not been paid since November, 1998. However, a technicality wherein the money is with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is yet to be cleared. The RBI is likely to make a submission to the court on Wednesday.

After MML stopped operations since July 1998, the Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti had petitioned the court demanding their wages.

The directions on the enquiry made by the division bench of Justice M B Ghodeswar and Justice B N Srikrishna followed a two-hour long argument in the court room where the status reports of the IDBI on the MML were analysed anddiscussed. Colin Gonsalves, counsel for the petitioners, and the IDBI counsel both claimed that funds had been used for functions that were not a part of the scheme.

This included a withdrawal of Rs 50 lakh in March 1999 from an account of Rs 1.36 crore, apparently to pay the workers in a voluntary retirement scheme (VRS), though VRS was not a part of the rehab scheme. Also, around Rs 8.82 crore had been shown to have been withdrawn in 1998 apparently towards VRS for about 90 workers. ``The company ought to explain how Rs 882 lakh has gone as retrenchment compensation,'' said Additional Solicitor General D Y Chandrachud appearing for the IDBI.

Gonsalves urged the court to ask the company how much money was deposited into the `no lien account' (operated only to implement the scheme) and what has happened to it.

Fighting what he called ``sniper shots'' from the opposing counsels, Jamshed Cama, counsel for the MML argued that the company could account for every paisa of the scheme. He pointed out that theno lien account was not operated by the company unilaterally, but by a committee that includes BIFR and IDBI representatives. ``MML did not offer any VRS scheme. It is the workers who themselves came in and asked for the voluntary separation scheme,'' Cama argued. Justice Srikrishna argued back that a VRS scheme could not be considered over the workers' legitimate claims on wages. Of the 852 workers around 650 workers remain with the mill now.

Admittedly the rehabilitation scheme pegged in 1996 at Rs 58.91 crore shot up to Rs 104.05 crore by 1998. While the sale of land, flats, TDR (transfer of development rights) brought in Rs 59.66 crore, Chandrachud pointed out that the company was supposed to cover the deficit. ``But while they brought in Rs 18.8 crore, Rs 4.31 crore still remains to be raised,'' he said.

Asked how much money is available in the no lien account, Cama said that around Rs 73.48 lakh with the account was in a fixed deposit. This was the money given by RBI which purchased 45 flats, whichwas to be kept as a deposit till November as a guarantee against any poor construction.

The court then directed that the petitioner send a notice to the RBI to know ``why the court should not direct the encashment of the fixed deposit for the disbursment of wages''. The court directed that the auditors chosen by IDBI investigate MML's accounts and submit them to J K Ray, chief general manager of IDBI who will then put it before the court. The IDBI has been given two months for the enquiry.