It has been more than six months since the Securities and Appellate Tribunal (SAT) saw a presiding officer chair the proceedings in the courtroom. Ever since Justice NK Sodhi retired in November last year, the government has not been able to name a successor.
According to lawyers dealing in matters related to the securities market, this void at the helm is affecting the work flow at the tribunal with some even questioning the quality of orders. They say that there is no one from the judiciary to hear the matters and decide on the interpretation of laws.
The composition of SAT as laid down by the government allows for one presiding officer who could be either a sitting or retired judge of the supreme court or chief justice of a high court and two members typically chosen from the bureaucracy. SAT is the platform where entities can challenge orders passed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi).
Currently, PK Malhotra (former additional secretary, law ministry) and SSN Moorthy (former chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes) are the two members. Incidentally, the government has directed Malhotra to preside over the proceedings till a new presiding officer is named.
?The quality will be definitely different as there is no one from the judiciary at the top,? says a lawyer dealing in Sebi-related matters. ?The members come from a non-judicial background though one of them was part of the law ministry. One may say that this is just a technical or legal handicap, but it does affect the decision-making process,? he explained on conditions of anonymity.
Another lawyer who has appeared in SAT on numerous occasions, says that ever since Justice Sodhi has retired, the tribunal has not come out with landmark judgments. With Justice Sodhi at the helm, SAT gave its verdict in many high-profile cases involving big corporate houses, insider trading charges and disgorgement.
Interestingly, in January, senior lawyer Janak Dwarkadas raised a question over SAT’s authority to decide on matters in the absence of a presiding officer. He raised this issue while appearing for IP Holdings Asia.
Though SAT has been coming out with orders, Dwarkadas argued that any tribunal cannot hear and decide on matters if there is no presiding officer. Dwarkadas could not be reached for comments as he is currently out of the country.
Lawyers say that the tribunal was known for its record of zero backlog of cases but any further delay in appointing the presiding officer could dent its image.