Till the end of first fortnight of September, Air India has a total due of Rs2,310.65 crore, of which the cash-strapped national carrier owes Rs1,563.67 crore to IOC, Rs409.82 crore to BPCL and Rs337.16 to HPCL, civil aviation minister Vayalar Ravi informed the Lok Sabha
New Delhi: State-owned air carrier Air India and its subsidiaries owe Rs2,310 crore to the oil marketing companies, reports PTI quoting civil aviation minister Vayalar Ravi.
“Till the end of first fortnight of September, Air India has a total due of Rs2,310.65 crore, of which the cash-strapped national carrier owes Rs1,563.67 crore to Indian oil Corporation, Rs409.82 crore to Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Rs337.16 to Hindustan Petroleum Corporation,” he said in a written reply to the Lok Sabha.
He said that in order to help the national carrier, a Group of Ministers (GoM) last month agreed to grant a credit period of three months as sought by airline’s management.
“The credit period, however, was agreed without exempting Air India from payment of interest,” the minister said.
Facing liquidity crunch, the national carrier has a debt of Rs22,000 crore as working capital loan and around Rs21,000 as aircraft acquisition loans.
In reply to a separate question, the minister said Air India has withdrawn its services from 14 routes, which were not profitable.
The routes are Mumbai-Sharjah, Calicut-Doha-Bahrain, Mumbai-Vadodara, Kolkata-Ahmedabad/Jaipur-Kolkata, Hyderabad- Mumbai, Chennai-Calicut, Chennai-Mumbai-Kuwait, Hyderabad- Cochin-Coimbatore-Hyderabad, Kolkata-Hyderabad-Kolkata, Bangalore-Singapore, Chennai-Coimbatore, Mumbai-Nairobi, Chennai-Dammam and Kochi-Agatti (which was later reinstated).
The minister also informed the House that due to the pilots’ strike from 27th April to 7th May, Air India has suffered a revenue loss of Rs200 crore.
Around 15 defence lawyers mentioned the matter before a bench of justices SK Kaul and Rajiv Shakdher and sought its intervention on the decision to shift the trial saying it would cause a lot of inconvenience to the lawyers and the accused
New Delhi: The accused in second generation (2G) spectrum case today approached the Delhi High Court challenging its administrative decision to shift the trial in the case from its present venue at Patiala House courts to the high-security Tihar jail, reports PTI.
Around 15 defence lawyers mentioned the matter before a bench of justices SK Kaul and Rajiv Shakdher and sought its intervention on the decision to shift the trial saying it would cause a lot of inconvenience to the lawyers and the accused.
“This case is not related to any terrorist activity where there is a security threat. It is only a case of economic offence that does not warrant this decision,” one of the defence lawyers said in the packed courtroom.
“Moreover, bigger courtrooms are already available in the Patiala House court complex where the trial could be conducted,” he said.
Justice Kaul responded to the plea by saying, “I will personally meet the acting Chief Justice and take up the matter...
“Suppose, you do not get adequate relief, then you can always move a writ petition on the issue,” he observed.
The court also said that the decision to shift the trial was an administrative one which had been taken by the acting chief justice, and he should be consulted on it. The bench asked the lawyers to approach it again later today.
The special CBI judge conducting the trial in the matter had yesterday announced shifting of the trial to Tihar jail from 24th November in accordance with a Delhi High Court notification of 21st November.
“In exercise of the powers conferred by section 9 (6) of the CrPC, 1973, the acting chief justice and judges of this court (Delhi High Court) have been pleased to order that the trial of the 2G spectrum cases shall be held in Tihar court complex, New Delhi, according to law,” the notification, issued by the high court, read.
All the accused, including former telecom minister A Raja and DMK MP Kanimozhi, have opposed the move.
“I do not know what is happening in this country. The shifting of the trial to Tihar jail would create a lot of problems as we will not be able to properly have legal consultation with our counsel.
“Till now, the lawyers could reach Patiala House courts from the Supreme Court or the high court within 10-15 minutes, but it would not be possible for them to reach Tihar jail as they would have to leave all their other cases,” Mr Raja had said yesterday after the judge had apprised them of the decision to change the trial venue.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court today granted bail to five corporate honchos—Unitech MD Sanjay Chandra, Swan Telecom director Vinod Goenka and Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani group executives Hari Nair, Gautam Doshi and Surrendra Pipara, arrested for their alleged roles in the case.
It seems unlikely that Vikram Akula’s exit will transform SKS Microfinance into a better-governed and -managed microfinance company. Only time can tell if and whether the exit of Vikram Akula would bring better times to SKS micro-finance, its investors and clients
The board of SKS Microfinance is said to be meeting in Mumbai today and it has been widely speculated that Vikram Akula is all said to resign from SKS Microfinance as its executive chairman. While the reasons for this are not exactly known, it has been suggested that the poor performance of the company during the last quarter has brought increased pressure on Mr Akula to resign.
Whether it happens or not is something we will hopefully know in a short while today. That said, if indeed Vikram Akula quits as has been extensively reported in the media, what are the implications for SKS Microfinance as a company?
Three questions are extremely relevant for investors and other stakeholders:
a) What will happen to SKS in its post Vikram era? Would the corporate governance issues and operating practices change for the better?
b) What about Vikram Akula’s successor and others at the helm of SKS (if and when he quits)? Will they be able to shepherd SKS Microfinance through its turbulent lines? What is their understanding of microfinance? What is their track record of governance and management?
c) What about the mutual benefit trusts (MBTs) and the low-income people to whom they belong? Who will control them? Who will safeguard their interests in SKS Microfinance? Who will assume responsibility for the huge (notional) losses caused to the MBTs owned by the low-income people?
A small divergence is necessary here. It is important to note that while many corporate and other investors have divested their shares, the MBTs have continued to hold (a majority of) their (huge) investments despite the steeply falling share price of SKS Microfinance (which stood at Rs112.90 per share today). Please recall that a little after SKS got listed, the shares were selling close to an all time high of Rs1,490.70 per share —this represents a fall of almost 92.43% from this super (share) price indeed.