Members of different SEs, including ASE, have been paying fees to SEBI as a certain percentage of the turnover since 1991-92. In the meantime, members of several exchanges have challenged the basis of deciding the fee in the high courts of their respective jurisdiction. While certain high courts have issued interim stay orders, others have not.

Members of ASE had also approached the Gujarat high court in 1992 but no stay order was issued. Since SEBI has appealed to the apex court against certain stay orders, ASE members also decided to join as a party to the case pending in the apex court.

The ASE members are now wary that those who have been regularly paying the fees based on turnover should not placed ina disadvantageous position vis-a-vis those who do not have to pay fee due to court's stay order or other reasons. According to ASE leaders, the present flat rate of a certain percentage of turnover could not be described as just, because trading opportunities differed from one bourse to another.

They suggested certain other norms for evolving an equitable formula, based on members' contributions, including annual subscriptions and liquid capital where interest income accrues to the SEs as part of their capital adequacy requirements. On a portion of the liquid capital, the interest does not accrue to the member but to the SEs.

They suggested this loss of the members contribution albeit indirectly, the transaction charges paid by members to the SEs, besides what the apex court decides, could be the parameters of determining the SEBI fees.