The Tata group is considering all legal options to move the Supreme Court seeking stay against the NCLAT order of restoring Cyrus Mistry as executive chairman of Tata Sons and other companies from where he was removed and the conversion of the company from private to public limited.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in its decision held the sacking of Cyrus Mistry from Tata’s boardroom three years back as ‘illegal’ and ‘oppressive’ and restored him as the executive chairman of Tata Sons and other companies on Wednesday.
With the immediate effect of NCLAT order, Cyrus Mistry became the director of three companies – Tata Consultancy Services Ltd (TCS), Tata Industries Ltd and Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Ltd – but officially, he needs to wait for the board meeting of these companies to become the director and discuss the December quarter earnings which is scheduled in third and fourth week of January.
However, the NCLAT order has given a time of four weeks for restoring him and to appeal in the apex court against the order. The business conglomerate does seem to wait for January 6 when the court will reopen after winter break. Tata Group is planning to move SC vacation bench for an early stay in the matter before the board meeting of the companies.
As the NCLAT order also held the appointment of Natarajan Chandrasekaran as ‘illegal’ and reversed the status of the company from private to public limited, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs will examine the conversion process from the public to private under the chairmanship of N. Chandrasekaran and Mumbai RoC.
The counsel of lawyers of Mistry had said that the decision for the company’s conversion was taken by the board of directors in a hurried manner with the ‘help of RoC’.
The NCLAT verdict used the word ‘mismanagement’ and categorically said that the company misused its powers against Mistry under the company’s Articles of Association, the Tata group is likely to challenge each and every term articulated in the verdict in the apex court.
The battle for the boardroom does not seem to end soon and will take more complex legal procedure ahead.