Delhi High Court rules in favor of Tata Group on Air India
Delhi High Court rules in favor of Tata Group on Air India Subramaniam Swamy had filed a petition maintaining that the bid process for the national airline was rigged The Delhi High Court has held that the bidding process for disinvestment of then -national airline, Air India was not rigged in favor of the Tata Group. A division bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jyoti...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Delhi High Court rules in favor of Tata Group on Air India
Subramaniam Swamy had filed a petition maintaining that the bid process for the national airline was rigged
The Delhi High Court has held that the bidding process for disinvestment of then -national airline, Air India was not rigged in favor of the Tata Group.
A division bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh observed that the bidding process saw keen competition with seven Expression of Interests and two bidders. It cannot be said that the process was tailor-made to facilitate the Talace Private Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tata Sons, which emerged as the highest bidder.
It, thus, dismissed the petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party's Member of Parliament Subramanian Swamy. The MP sought quashing of the disinvestment process on the ground that the bid process was arbitrary, corrupt, against public interest and rigged in favor of the Tata Group. He said it was a planned and collusive strategy.
The order stated, that acquiring Air India by entertaining a bid on behalf of SpiceJet was also devoid of merit, mainly for the reason that the disinvestment process saw keen competition.
The court noted that SpiceJet was not the second bidder. Rather, a consortium in which the lead member was Ajay Singh, owner of SpiceJet, submitted the financial bid. However, he had participated in his individual capacity.
It added, "There is no material on record which would support the allegations of the petitioner that the respondent colluded with Singh's consortium or was aware of the consortium's bidding strategy."
The bench observed that a reserve price was fixed after the receipt of the sealed financial bids for the transaction, based on valuation using methodologies, as per the established process.
It held that Air India disinvestment was a policy decision made by the Central government after due deliberations at various levels. It was not open to interference in judicial review, in the exercise of jurisdiction under the Indian Constitution.
