Interim supervisory measures continued pending final adjudication while the appointed Executive Officer is discharged and salary dispute remitted.

Interim supervisory measures appointing an Executive Officer to oversee multiple companies are continued pending final adjudication, with the Tribunal's modified interim directions remaining operative and factual disputes about withdrawals remitted for determination by the adjudicating forum. The Executive Officer's application for discharge is allowed and he is relieved of duties. Directions are issued for the investigative agency to meet the former Executive Officer to seek resolution of salary and perks claims, with the contempt proceeding adjourned for report and further listing; substantive rights and merits are reserved to the adjudicating forum.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Appellate Tribunal's interim order dated 4.10.2018 appointing an Executive Officer to supervise 32 companies and modifying the Tribunal's interim order should be continued/confirmed or set aside; (ii) Whether the application by Sh. Shyam Murari Nigam (I.A. No. 3051 of 2019) to be discharged from his duties as Executive Officer should be allowed; (iii) Direction in respect of the contempt petition (Contempt Case (AT) No. 18 of 2021) concerning payment of salary/perks to the Executive Officer.

Issue (i): Continuation/confirmation or setting aside of the Appellate Tribunal's interim order dated 4.10.2018 appointing an Executive Officer and modifying the Tribunal's earlier interim order.

Analysis: The Appellate Tribunal had earlier on 4.10.2018 appointed an Executive Officer with specified supervisory powers and restrictions on transfers and expenditures of the companies, and modified the NCLT interim order accordingly. The Tribunal recorded that its interim directions would continue until final disposal of the company petition and permitted the Union of India to inform the NCLT if any appellant withdrew amounts after the orders, leaving factual inquiries about withdrawals to the Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal did not decide merits of claims and counterclaims and left substantive adjudication to the Tribunal. The appeals challenging the NCLT interim order were disposed with the above observations and directions.

Conclusion: The interim order of 4.10.2018 appointing an Executive Officer and modifying the Tribunal's interim order is reaffirmed and continued until final disposal of the company petition, subject to the observations and directions recorded by the Appellate Tribunal.

Issue (ii): Whether I.A. No. 3051 of 2019 filed by Sh. Shyam Murari Nigam to be discharged from his duties as Executive Officer should be allowed.

Analysis: The application by the Executive Officer seeking discharge was considered on the averments made and after hearing the applicant's counsel and respondent's counsel. The Tribunal evaluated the request and concluded it was appropriate to discharge the individual from the appointed role.

Conclusion: I.A. No. 3051 of 2019 is allowed and Sh. Shyam Murari Nigam is discharged from his duties as Executive Officer.

Issue (iii): Directions concerning Contempt Case (AT) No. 18 of 2021 relating to payment of salary/perks to the petitioner who had been appointed as Executive Officer.

Analysis: The Tribunal directed the Serious Fraud Investigation Office to hold a meeting with the petitioner to explore resolution of the salary/perks dispute and to report the outcome at the next hearing; no final determination on contempt or payments was made.

Conclusion: The Respondent/SFIO is directed to hold a meeting with the petitioner and to submit the outcome; the contempt matter is adjourned to the next listed date.

Final Conclusion: The Appellate Tribunal continued and reaffirmed its interim supervisory regime (as modified on 4.10.2018) pending final disposal of the company petition, allowed the Executive Officer's discharge application, and directed procedural steps in the contempt matter while leaving substantive issues and factual determinations to the Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: An Appellate Tribunal may, in the exercise of its powers under the relevant company law provisions, appoint a retired government officer as an Executive Officer to supervise company operations and finances and to ensure going-concern activities and investigatory cooperation; such interim supervisory measures may be continued pending final adjudication while factual disputes about withdrawals or violations are remitted to the Tribunal for determination.

---