The Supreme Court ordered the CBI probe into the HZL divestment in 2002 – News2IN
India

The Supreme Court ordered the CBI probe into the HZL divestment in 2002

The Supreme Court ordered the CBI probe into the HZL divestment in 2002
Written by news2in

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered regular case registration for a full CBI investigation into alleged irregularities in sales of 26% of government shares in Hindustan Seng Ltd to Sterlite, a subsidiary of Vedanta, for RS 445 Crore in 2002 when the value was suspected of being RS 39,000 Crore.
Blame the closure of the initial investigation of the CBI (PE) despite including a lot of deviations in sales at the PSU while getting rid of critical reports of CAG, Judge Dy Chandrachud and BV Nagaratha ordered the CBI to conduct full investigation into 18 suspicious reasons around its surrounding agreement.
“There is enough material for regular case registration in connection with 26% HZL detention by the United States in 2002.
The CBI is directed to register regular cases and continue in accordance with the law.
The CBI is directed to register regular cases and regularly submit the status report on this court .
the report mentioned above will be submitted quarterly, or as directed by this court, “the bench said, while the Green-signaling residi sales 29.5% government stake in HZL, the decision taken in 2012 by the UPA government.
Sales have occurred during the working period of the Vajpayee government.
Writing Assessment, Chandrachud Judge said, “The Union Government is HZL shareholders.
HZL control and management is not a vest with the Government Government that has residual shares of 29.54%.
Ownership of Sterlite and Ventures (SOVL) opportunities stand up to 64.92% After the implementation of the first call option in 2002.
During hearing, this court was notified by Sterlite that it was not trying to train the second call of options, in terms of stock purchase agreements.
“There was in this background that the decision was taken by the United States to sell share ownership His resid is on the open market.
The United States Government, in his capacity as HZL shareholders, has the right to make such decisions.
The fact that the Government Government can accept the norms stipulated in the Part III of the Constitution will not impose restraints at its capacity to decide, as a shareholder, to eliminate its share ownership, during the transparent disinvestment process and the Union Government is following a process that comorting with law and producing prices The best realized for its share ownership.
“Further benches said,” The Union Government has stated through Public Lawyers Tushar Mehta that residual ownership will be divested in the open market and will occur in accordance with the regulations and regulations to ensure that the best prices are realized by share ownership sales.
“The center was first negated 24.08% of its shares in HZL in 1991-92 when Manmohan Singh was the Minister of Finance and wrote Indian economic liberalization.
In April 2002, the center had sold 26% from its part for RS 445 Crore to SOVL.
Sterlite acquired 20% more from the HZL share of the open market, raising its share ownership in the Iersthile PSU to 46%.
Under the 2002 shareholder agreement, which imagined two call options, Sterlite used the first of 18.92% of HZL equity in August 2003 , which was transferred for November 2003.
Sterlite became the majority shareholder with 64.92% of the shares in HZL.
In 2012, the Center has decided to sell ownership of his residual share of 29.54% in HZL.
On November 6, 2013, the CBI has initiated an investigation PE concerning alleged irregularities in the course of provision of 26% equity that holds the Union government to Sterlite in 2002.
CBI Special Prosecutor, Director of Prosecution D The Special Director has approved the closing of the PE.
But the Additional Director of the CBI insisted on changing PE into a regular case.
After examining the reasons given to the closure of PE, Bench said, “After reading the report and the recommendations mentioned above, it is our opinion that we considered that it was disinvedified in 2002 Evinces the main facie case for regular case registration.” Then registered 18 important where regular cases should be registered, while agreeing with Advocate Prashant Bhushan for a complete CBI investigation.

About the author

news2in