The SAT in its December 2021 order had stayed an order of SEBI against Yatin Pandya, the respondent in Supreme Court.
The respondent had appealed to SAT against the original order of the adjudicating officer citing, among other things, the 11-year delay in issuing a show-cause notice given the alleged irregular trading activities they were being probed for was between May 2008 and September 2009.
In its order, the SAT had stated the following:
“Inspite of making a specific assertion, the Adjudicating Officer (‘AO’) has dealt issue-1 in paragraph 12 in a very casual manner without dealing with the contention of the appellant. Prima facie in our view this amounts to judicial dishonesty … Let a reply be filed by the respondent which shall be sworn by the AO himself within a week from today.” (emphasis added)
SEBI had moved the top court against the same.
The plea before the top court contended that the said order was erroneous, unsustainable in law, and exceeded the jurisdiction of the SAT. It stated that that there was no delay involved if the records were called for an examined.
It was submitted that the aggressive comments made by SAT were unwarranted and it had no powers to try the regulatory official.
The said adverse remarks will impede the SEBI’s ability to work fearlessly and independently, it was argued.