SC to HC : decide Maytas issue in 6 weeks
In view of the plea of some investor companies in Maytas, a group company of scam-tainted Satyam computers that their financial interests should be protected in the wake of the reconstitution of its board, the Supreme Court on Monday asked the AP high court to dispose off the case within six weeks.
The petition was moved in the Supreme Court by SRS Orion Investment Ltd, which sought to protect its investment worth nearly `1,300 crores in Maytas. Some other firms having substantial investment also made identical plea.
The cases before the high court had arisen from the Company Law Board’s March 5, 2009 order reconstituting the Maytas Board with four expert representing the government, senior advocate Harish Salve told a bench of Chief Justice of India S.H. Kapadia and Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and Swatanter Kumar.
Mr Salve said though SRS had arbitration award in its favour stating that its right be protected, the CLB had said that the company could not be granted such a relief as it was a matter between the government and Maytas.
However, the high court had said that the CLB had not given any reasons.
“Protect my (SRS) money invested in the company. The total investment is nearly `1,300 crores,” Mr Salve said.
Similarly, advocate Mukul Rohtagi, counsel for CL&FS, another investor, stated that the company had about `150 crores investment in Maytas.
Considering their plea, the CJI passed a brief order that the high court should have heard all the appeals together and directed it to take up them jointly and decide the matter within six weeks as case had been pending for over two years now.
The top court came down heavily on Maytas for raking up unnecessary issues before the high court when the case ought to have been decided by the CLB.
“Why these things not be decided by the CLB. Why you are unnecessarily dragging the matter. Why CLB can’t decide it. They (investors) have been given an award (by the arbitrator). They have invested huge amount of money. They have a right to be heard. Why CLB should not be given an opportunity to decide,” CJI asked Maytas’ counsel.
Post new comment