Trust Ordered to Increase Public Shareholding; SEBI Emphasizes Compliance & Investor Protection

The court directed the trust to sell a specific number of shares to the public by a deadline to address the issue of inadequate public shareholding, ensuring compliance with the minimum threshold set by regulations. The Securities and Exchange Board of India's concerns regarding the violation of securities regulations due to substantial shares being parked in the trust were acknowledged, emphasizing the importance of transparency and investor protection in the securities market. The trust's creation was questioned as an attempt to bypass mandatory public shareholding requirements, with SEBI emphasizing the need for adherence to regulatory standards and investor confidence.

---

---

Issues:
1. Violation of Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules and Rules and Orders made under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 by parking shares in a trust.
2. Public shareholding in a listed company falling below the mandated 25% of its paid-up capital.
3. Justification of the clause in the scheme of arrangement and amalgamation by the amalgamated company.
4. Creation and legality of the trust and its role in maintaining public shareholding.
5. Sale of shares held by the trust to achieve the minimum public shareholding threshold.
6. Compliance with regulations and directives of SEBI regarding the sale of shares to the public.

Analysis:
1. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) raised concerns regarding Clause 3.3 in a scheme of arrangement and amalgamation, alleging a violation of securities regulations due to the substantial shares being parked in a trust, reducing the public shareholding in the amalgamated company to 4.32%.
2. SEBI argued that public shareholding in a listed company should not fall below 25% of its paid-up capital, emphasizing the importance of maintaining transparency and investor protection in the securities market.
3. The amalgamated company defended the clause, citing special circumstances where the majority of shares were held by government entities and one specific company before the merger, leading to the unique shareholding structure post-amalgamation.
4. The legality and purpose of the trust were questioned by SEBI, asserting that the trust's creation was an attempt to bypass the mandatory public shareholding requirement and should be held accountable for the shares it held in the company.
5. To address the issue of inadequate public shareholding, the court directed the trust to sell a specific number of shares to the public by a certain deadline, ensuring compliance with the minimum public shareholding threshold set by regulations.
6. SEBI's directives regarding the sale of shares, the involvement of a committee overseeing the sale process, and the need for transparency in the sale transactions were highlighted to ensure adherence to regulatory standards and investor confidence in the market.

---