HC rejects PIL challenging Sambit Patra's appointment in ONGC

The Delhi High Court today dismissed a PIL challenging BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra's appointment as an independent director in the ONGC, saying the plea was "unsubstantiated" and "without merit".
A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar also rejected the opposition to the appointment of Shashi Shanker as the Chairman and Managing Director of the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC).
The petition by NGO Energy Watchdog had challenged Shanker's appointment on the ground that he was suspended in February 2015 for six months in connection with a probe into the award of a contract by ONGC.

The bench rejected the NGO's contention saying it was "completely untenable and devoid of any factual or legal merit".
It also noted in its order that there was no allegation in the entire petition that Shanker was not eligible or competent to hold the post in question or that he did not have the requisite experience.
Patra's appointment to the post of independent director in ONGC was challenged by the NGO on several grounds, which included that the procedures was not followed, his alleged lack of relevant experience and qualifications and his proximity to the ruling party at the Centre.

With regard to the contention that he was closely related to the ruling party in power, being its spokesperson, the court said the NGO has not alleged that Patra or his relatives have or had any pecuniary relationship with the PSU or its subsidiaries, holding company or promoters.

Therefore, to doubt his independence to discharge his duties and functions as a director, merely because he is a spokesperson of BJP "would be highly inappropriate", the bench said in its 51-page order.
The court also brushed aside the NGO's contention that Patra ought not to have been appointed as he was a doctor and ONGC had nothing to do in the field of medicine, saying it cannot be contended that experience in healthcare would be of no relevance or consequence to the operations of the PSU.

"The Board of Directors of such an organisation must stay alive to the needs of health and environment and the presence of a medical expert on the Board of Directors cannot be considered to be an appointment on an irrelevant criteria," the bench said.
It further added that "professionals like doctors, lawyers, chartered accountants would undoubtedly make value additions in any domain or field".
Given the multifarious concerns required to be addressed by companies nowadays, the court said it cannot be contended that a person must necessarily possess knowledge and experience only of the business or activity which is being undertaken by the company.

"On the contrary, the expertise in diverse fields and valuable experience of directors on the Board even in areas unrelated to the core businesses of the concerned company, may greatly enrich and contribute to development, diversification and improvement of a corporate entity," the court said.
It also rejected the NGO's claim that proper procedure was not followed in Patra's appointment, saying he was appointed on the recommendation of the Search Committee "which would have considered his qualifications and eligibility".
"It is not open to this court to re-examine this issue and sit in judgement over the view taken," the bench said and added "the above narration would show that the petitioner (NGO) has filed unsubstantiated pleas and also has not made out a prima facie case in support of the challenge".

"Be that as it may, we have examined the challenge by the petitioner and found it without merit. For all these reasons, no interference upon the petitioner's challenge is warranted. This writ petition is dismissed," the court said.