SAT admits Chitra Ramkrishna’s plea against SEBI order; directs NSE, Ramkrishna to deposit money

Business


Tribunal directs SEBI to submit reply within 4 weeks, schedules hearing for June 30

Tribunal directs SEBI to submit reply within 4 weeks, schedules hearing for June 30

The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) has admitted former NSE chief Chitra Ramkrishna’s plea against a SEBI order in relation to governance lapses at the bourse and directed her to deposit an amount of ₹2 crore.

The appellate tribunal also directed NSE to deposit more than ₹4 crore towards leave encashment and deferred bonus of Ramkrishna in an escrow account as against SEBI’s direction where the amount was to be parked in the Investor Protection Fund Trust.

In an order dated February 11, SEBI had slapped a penalty of ₹3 crore on Ms. Ramkrishna for alleged governance lapses in a case related to the appointment of Anand Subramanian as the Group Operating Officer and Advisor when she was at the helm of NSE as its Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer.

Besides, the watchdog had asked NSE to deposit the excess leave encashment of ₹1.54 crore and the deferred bonus of ₹2.83 crore of Ms. Ramkrishna in the Investor Protection Fund Trust.

Passing a four-page order, dated April 11, after accepting an appeal filed by Ms. Ramkrishna, SAT said that various questions raised would be considered at the time of hearing of the appeal.

It also directed SEBI to submit its reply within four weeks. SAT has listed the case for hearing on June 30.

“However, considering the fact and circumstances that has been brought on record and to balance the equities as well as balance of convenience, we direct NSE… to deposit ₹4.73 crore towards leave encashment and deferred bonus of the appellant in an escrow account of instead of depositing it in the Investor Protection Fund Trust,” SAT said.

It also noted that such a deposit in the escrow account would be subject to the result of the appeal.

Further, SAT directed Ms. Ramkrishna to deposit a sum of ₹2 crore within six weeks from April 11. “If such an amount is deposited, the balance amount shall not be recovered during the pendancy of the appeal,” it noted and dismissed the stay application.

Ms. Ramkrishna’s counsel C.S. Vaidyanathan contested SEBI’s decision to levy fine under Section 23A of the Securities Contract Regulation Act (SCRA).

He argued that the provision, being prospective, could not apply to any violation which was committed prior to the amending Act and therefore the penalty under this head was “incorrect and could not be sustained”.

According to the counsel, SEBI passed the order without granting an opportunity of hearing which was violative of Article 14 Constitution of India.

Further, he argued that the regulator had no power to interfere in the autonomy or internal management of NSE Limited.

Apart from penalising Ms. Ramkrishna in the governance lapses case, SEBI had imposed penalty on Ravi Narain, who was the predecessor of Ms. Ramkrishna, and others.

Further, Ms. Ramkrishna had been restrained from associating with any market infrastructure institution or any intermediary registered with SEBI for a period of three years, while the same for Mr. Narain was two years.

In its 190-page order, passed on February 11, SEBI found that Ms. Ramkrishna was steered by ‘a yogi dwelling in the Himalayan ranges’ in the appointment of Mr. Subramanian.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.