Uttam Galva's small investors move SAT against ArcelorMittal derecognition
Tribunal refuses any immediate stay; Both BSE and NSE had approved derocognition of L N Mittal-led firm as Uttam Galva promoter last week
)
premium
TMinority shareholders of Uttam Galva Steels have moved the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) against the stock exchanges’ nod for declassification of ArcelorMittal as a promoter of Uttam Galva.
Both the BSE and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) had approved the declassification last week.
Counsel representing the shareholders submitted that the reclassification was in violation of Listing Regulations. An informal guidance from Sebi had not been sought, and the reclassification was not approved by the shareholders in a general meeting, it was alleged.
However, SAT refused any immediate stay on the promoter declassification nod. According to the order, the transfer of shares from Arcelor to Sainath being an inter-se transfer between promoters, it appeared, prima facie, that an approval from the shareholders, as contemplated under Regulation 31A(5), would not apply to the present case.
It further said the fact that the two stock exchanges, without waiting for the informal guidance from Sebi, had approved the reclassification separately, and not jointly, could not be a ground to stay the impugned decisions of the NSE and the BSE, pending disposal of the appeal on merits. The tribunal will hear the matter on April 23.
A stay on declassification could have put ArcelorMittal’s rebid for Essar Steel in trouble. The date for rebid is April 2. In the first round, both Numetal and ArcelorMittal were found to be ineligible. Though legal advisors to ArcelorMittal were divided on the reasons for ArcelorMittal’s ineligibility, one view was that it was not eligible as it was not declassified from the stock exchanges as a promoter of Uttam Galva.
Both the BSE and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) had approved the declassification last week.
Counsel representing the shareholders submitted that the reclassification was in violation of Listing Regulations. An informal guidance from Sebi had not been sought, and the reclassification was not approved by the shareholders in a general meeting, it was alleged.
However, SAT refused any immediate stay on the promoter declassification nod. According to the order, the transfer of shares from Arcelor to Sainath being an inter-se transfer between promoters, it appeared, prima facie, that an approval from the shareholders, as contemplated under Regulation 31A(5), would not apply to the present case.
It further said the fact that the two stock exchanges, without waiting for the informal guidance from Sebi, had approved the reclassification separately, and not jointly, could not be a ground to stay the impugned decisions of the NSE and the BSE, pending disposal of the appeal on merits. The tribunal will hear the matter on April 23.
A stay on declassification could have put ArcelorMittal’s rebid for Essar Steel in trouble. The date for rebid is April 2. In the first round, both Numetal and ArcelorMittal were found to be ineligible. Though legal advisors to ArcelorMittal were divided on the reasons for ArcelorMittal’s ineligibility, one view was that it was not eligible as it was not declassified from the stock exchanges as a promoter of Uttam Galva.