Comments
The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) on Monday stayed SEBI’s June 12 order restraining Rajib Kumar Mishra, who was CMD of PTI India and non-executive director of PFS, from holding any director’s post for six months.
Following the SEBI order, Mishra ceased to be CMD of India’s largest power trading company and the non-executive director of its subsidiary, PFC (PTC India Financial Services). Mishra moved SAT challenging the SEBI order.
In its order, SAT said, “In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing subject to deposit of 50 per cent of the penalty amount by the appellant with the SEBI within two weeks from today.”
The next date of hearing is on August 2, 2024.
The tribunal gave SEBI’s counsel four weeks to file their reply and two weeks to Mishra’s counsel, after SEBI’s reply, to file rejoinder, if any. Earlier this month, Mishra had told businessline that he is planning to challenge the SEBI order.
On June 12, the capital markets regulator restrained Mishra from holding the director’s post in any listed firm for six months and imposed a penalty of ₹10 lakh on him for corporate governance lapses. Subsequently, he ceased to be the non-executive director of PFS and CMD of PTC India.
Crisis deepens
Sources said that Mishra was a non-executive chairman and nominee director on the board of PFS and any non-executive board member does not have any authority and delegation of power as per Articles of Association.
Another issue was the delay in the joining of Ratnesh Kumar, who was Chief General Manager at NTPC, as Director Finance at PFS. Kumar went back to NTPC after his appointment was stalled. Another source said the appointment was to be done by the HR department and not Mishra’s responsibility.
Also read: SEBI rolls back diktat to end special rights before IPO
On loan disbursal, sources pointed out that all loan accounts were handled by PFS executives, including the management. The forensic audit conducted and the data requirement for that was purely in the domain of the NBFC and the availability of data and facilitation thereof was also the responsibility of its management.
“The flow of information to the independent directors (IDs) was PFS management’s responsibility and the company secretary in a timely manner,” another source said.
Comments
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.