Haldia Petro: SC defers HC order

The Supreme Court today put on hold the Calcutta High Court judgement that set aside the Company Law Board (CLB) order directing the West Bengal government to sell all its shares in Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd (HPL) to The Chatterjee Group (TCG).

A Bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhan temporarily deferred the High Court order for four weeks after senior counsel FS Nariman, appearing for Chatterjee Petrochem (India) Pvt Ltd (CPPL), sought a status quo order on the ground that the company had not been given a copy of the judgment.

The Bench directed that interim order dated February 16, 2007 passed by the High Court would continue for four weeks from now.

The High Court in its order had directed that the position existing on the date of the CLB order would continue till the disposal of the appeal.

Chatterjee Petrochem had moved the apex court challenging the High Court order early this month that stayed the CLB order dated January 31, this year asking the state government to exit from HPL by selling its 155 million shares to TCG at a greater valuation to be determined by the board appointed valuer or at the rate of Rs 28.80 per share.

According to the company, it had been furnished only with an authenticated copy of the speaking order and had not been provided the final judgment.

It said the High Court had erred in overlooking that the state government and West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation (WBIDC) indulged in acts oppressive to TCG in running the affairs of the company and had wrongly denied the group's right and entitlement to manage the company.

The Supreme Court also issued notices to HPL, WBIDC, West Bengal government, Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Purnendu Chatterjee, IDBI, Chatterjee Petrochem, Winstar India Investment Company and India Trade (Mauritius) Ltd among others.

While seeking setting aside of the High Court order, Chatterjee Petrochem had sought quashing of the allotment of shares to IOC and a direction to the state government to transfer the shares of HPL to it in accordance with the agreement between the parties.

It also sought reconstitution of the board of directors of HPL and the right to nominate the majority of directors in their capacity as the majority shareholders of the company.

It had also sought to restrain HPL from holding the board meeting scheduled to be held on October 1 and from taking decisions on contentious issues like allotment of shares to lenders, appointment of auditors and holding of annual general meetings of shareholders.