SEBI Filed Petition In The Supreme Court Against Sahara Group
SEBI filed petition in the Supreme Court asking for Rs 626 billion from Sahara Group.
India’s market regulator SEBI has filed a petition in the Supreme Court.
Sebi has asked the petition to direct Sahara Group Chairman Subrata Roy and his two companies to deposit Rs 626 billion ($ 8.4 billion).
This money is owed to its investors.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) said in the Supreme Court that Sahara failed to comply with the court’s order of 2012 and 2015 of depositing the entire amount taken from its investors with 15 percent annual interest.
The leading news agency gave this information in a report by looking at the copy of the petition filed.
Sahara, once the sponsor of India’s national cricket team, has to pay billions of dollars to investors who put their money in a bond scheme that was later deemed illegal.
Sahara Group President Subrata Roy was arrested in March 2014 for failing to appear for contempt of court hearings and has been on bail since 2016. He has denied any wrongdoing.
SEBI said that the regulator faced a lot of inconvenience due to non-compliance by Sahara for more than eight years and if they failed to deposit the amount, they should be detained for being guilty of contempt.
Sebi told the court, ‘Sahara has made no effort to follow orders and instructions. On the other hand, the liability is increasing daily and they are enjoying being free from custody. ‘
EPFO reports fall in October as members and contributing companies baseless
Retirement fund organization EPFO on Thursday dismissed media reports about a fall in the number of firms and clients contributing to its social security schemes in October.
The Employees Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) is a statutory organization under the Ministry of Labor and Employment.
A statement from the Ministry of Labor stated, “On November 18, 2020, an article was published in a section of the media titled ‘Shortfall in customers and companies associated with EPFO in the month of October’.
In this regard, EPFO clarified Is that the information in the article is incorrect and baseless. “
