Reliance MediaWorks to delist from BSE & NSE at the exit price of Rs61 a piece, with 25.39% premium over its floor price
Reliance MediaWorks Ltd (RMW), an ADA Group company, fixed the final exit price for its delisting at Rs61 per share. This is at a premium of 25.39% over the floor price of RMW.
Reliance Land Pvt Ltd and Reliance Capital Ltd, the promoters of RMW, has invited shareholders of the company to submit bids pursuant to a reverse book-building process through the electronic system of BSE and arrived at the exit price.
“The final price determined through reverse book-building process for accepting the equity shares successfully tendered in the delisting offer is Rs61 per share of Rs5 each, which is at a premium of 25.39%over the floor price of Rs48.65,” the company said in a regulatory filing.
“All shares shall be acquired validly tendered at or below the exit price and Reliance MediaWorks shareholders who have validly tendered shares will be paid consideration at the exit price,” it added.
On 20th January, RMW board approved a delisting offer, which was later cleared by the shareholders. Earlier Moneylife wrote; Reliance MediaWorks to delist from BSE, NSE mentioning about the two promoters’ offer to buyback additional 26.7% stake and to delist RMW.
On 11th March, Reliance MediaWorks hits its 52-week high on the BSE at Rs59.75.
On Thursday, Reliance MediaWorks closed 1.72% higher at Rs59.05 on the BSE while the 30-share benchmark closed marginally up at 22,214.
India need to have extra professional help in restructuring the railways, by laying extra tracks, getting bigger capacity wagons and locomotives to move them, and make the freight attractive enough
It may be recalled that, in the interim budget, Railway Minister, Mallikarjun Kharge outlined plans to start 72 new train services, which include 17 premium and 38 express trains. In a year from now, a Railway Tariff Authority is also expected to be set up, which will advise the government on fixing fares and freight rates. It will also have a say in development matters relating to this huge enterprise, which has, at the moment, 35,000 Kms rails, which also carries a substantial quantum of cargo within the country.
Recent development plans to upgrade the railway network has been projected to cost Rs2,000 crore and the target for 2014-15 has been fixed at 1,101 million tonnes of freight. The share of rail in freight is reported to be about 25% compared to 50% in the case of both China and USA. This, one can see, is insufficient utilisation of the cheapest form of transportation available in the country, for which, thankfully, the main fuel element of coal is available in the country, except that, it needs to be mined and evacuated rapidly from pit heads!
Among the many plans that Railway ministry has had, they now plan to push through three crucial railway link projects by 2016 that will facilitate evacuation and delivery of 300 million tonnes of coal annually from mines in Jharkhand, Chhatisgarh and Odisha. These projects were actually started in 1999, and the corridors covered are: Tori-Shivpuri-Kathotia in Jharkhand; Bhudeopur-Korichhaapar in Chhatisgarh and Barpali-Jharasaguda in Odisha.
The new Railway minister, on taking over responsibility, needs to expedite these pending projects rather than spend time to apportion blame for the delays.
Although Japan has been a pioneer in building high speed rail lines, it is China, in a short space of time, laid 13,000 Kms of high speed rail network, laying new tracks on elevated rails, thus avoiding and or by use of minim farm land. In fact, China has been keen to get involved in India in setting up high speed rails. but for a number of reasons, India has not shown keen interest, at this point of time. They would rather secure Chinese expertise in raising the speed in selected corridors. Chinese experts have claimed that they would be able to raise the speed from current 130 Kms per hour to 160 Kms or up 200 Kms, if an opportunity was given to them.
It may be recalled that both India and China have been carrying on a dialogue under the Strategic Economic Dialogue (SED) to discuss and formulate plans for economic development. The third such meeting was held recently, when Planning Commission Vice Chairman, Montek Singh Ahluwalia met the Chinese Premier Li Kiqiang. It is reported that India would seek their expertise in heavy haul and raising the speed on its existing rail network which would possibly require realigning track and strengthening of bridges. At the moment, India is not keen to get the Chinese high speed rails!
Recently, the Chairman of Japan Railway Central, Yoshiyuki Kasai was in the country He has been keen watching the developments in India, particularly the contract that Japan was awarded to carry out a detailed project report into the feasibility of a Mumbai-Vadodara high speed rail line.
He is reported to have indicated that JRC was not looking to invest in high speed rail systems in India, because, first, it needs the Indian government to fund a large part of the infrastructure required before such a scheme can become a reality.
The Chairman of Indian Railways, Arunendra Kumar, appears to have stated that the cost of high speed track would be in the region of Rs120 crore, possibly hinting that it would be an expensive proposition, at least for the time being, to think of building such tracks. Unlike China, which has no serious problems in acquiring the needed land, land acquisition in India is a laborious process, where a disgruntled or a greedy politician can start an agitation to stop the process in no time. We have hundreds of cases where work could not proceed due to these "instigated" public protests and agitations.
Chairman Kasai has observed, while meeting the press persons, that it would be good idea for the Railways to actually use the existing tracks for movement of freight and then, simultaneously, start planning and laying high speed rails to move passengers This suggestion, by him, is worth not only noting but the
Ministry must try to act on the same.
We need to have extra professional help in restructuring our railways, by laying extra tracks, getting bigger capacity wagons and locomotives to move them, and make the freight attractive enough so that the freight from road transport, which guzzles millions of litres of fossil fuel, is reduced.
So far, the captive coal mines have been given to power plants so as to ensure continuity of generation and supply; why have captive coal mines not been allocated for exclusive use by Railways?
(AK Ramdas has worked with the Engineering Export Promotion Council of the ministry of commerce. He was also associated with various committees of the Council. His international career took him to places like Beirut, Kuwait and Dubai at a time when these were small trading outposts; and later to the US.)
While Nandan Nilekani, former chairman of UIDAI, is busy fighting his election, he has left behind a dubious record of keeping the Aadhaar holders in the dark regarding access to their biometrics and other personal details by any private or public agency
Now, it is from the horse’s mouth. The office of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has admitted that information regarding biometrics and other personal details of Aadhaar, the 12-digit unique identification (UID) number, to any outside agency cannot be revealed to the holder unless it is requested by the government. In addition, once you have been allocated the UID number, there is no way to delete or cancel it, which means you cannot opt out of it. More shocking is that Aadhaar was never used to authenticate subsidies for the LPG cylinder. It was just used as an identifier for the bank.
The second appeal was heard In a Central Information Commission (CIC) Sharat Sabharwal’s office on 13 March, 2014, wherein he stated that although the RTI applicant, CJ Karira had filed a requisition under Section 7 of the RTI Act, which requires the PIO to give information within 48 hours; the requisition does not specifically come under this section. However, his order stated: “…we took this appeal up for consideration out of turn as the answers of the public authority to the queries of the Appellant in the instant case may be of interest to a large number of UID card holders, who may have similar apprehensions as the Appellant regarding sharing of the data provided by them to the UIDAI for obtaining a UID card.”
Karira, co-convener of India Against Corruption (IAC) filed a RTI application on 27 September 2013 seeking information regarding sharing of his Aadhaar data to outside agencies. He also asked for certified copies of the agencies with whom the data has been shared and procedure to delete one’s name from the UID register.
Not having received a reply from the CPIO, he filed an appeal to the First Appellate Authority (FAA) on 13 November, 2013. The FAA did not conduct any hearing or pass any order. On 23 December 2013, the CPIO gave him partial and wrong information, particularly regarding the query of whether details of his UID number was shared with any agency.
Karira stated to the FAA that the “information provided by the CPIO vide his letter dated 23 December 2013, was ‘incomplete and incorrect’, because HPCL and the State Bank of Mysore had his UID number and got the same authenticated through UIDAI, while the CPIO had stated in his reply that his data had not been shared with any entity outside the UIDAI.”
Karira again asked for “complete and correct information free of charge; imposition of penalty on the CPIO under section 20(1) of the RTI Act for the delay in provision of information; a warning to the FAA to dispose of appeals to him within the stipulated time limits under the RTI Act; departmental action against the CPIO and the FAA under the relevant rules and regulations and; a direction to the public authority to arrange training on RTI matters for its concerned officials.”
Having failed to get the required information and to request action against delay of information, Karira went in second appeal with the CIC on 15 January 2014.
The CIC order observes during the hearing on 13 March, 2014, “… it is seen that three of his queries related to the requests… for authentication/ confirmation/ matching of any of his data held by the UIDAI, the details of the persons or entities asking for such authentication etc. and certified copies of requests for such authentication and replies by the UIDAI..”
“The CPIO had stated in his reply dated 23 December 2013 that Karira’s data had not been shared with any entity outside the UIDAI. Karira has submitted that this information was misleading, because he had given his UID number to his gas agency and bank in connection with provision of subsidy on supply of cooking gas cylinders.”
“UIDAI stated that the use of the UID number, provided by the Appellant to his gas agency and bank, was for the limited purpose of ensuring that the person being provided the gas cylinders and subsidy was the same. It did not involve authentication/ matching by those agencies with the data held by them.”
The shocker is about the procedure to surrender one’s Aadhaar number. The order observes: “Two of the queries related to the procedure by which a UID number holder could surrender his UID number and card and get his data erased from the data base of the UIDAI. The CPIO informed the Appellant vide his letter dated 13th and 16 January 2014 that as on date, there was no such procedure adopted by the UIDAI to delete the UID number from the UID database.
The last query in the RTI application sought information regarding the non-UIDAI entities/ persons, who have access to his personal/ demographic/ biometric data held by UIDAI or with whom UIDAI has shared such data.
“…The CPIO stated that data would be shared only on a formal request by the State concerned through the Nodal Departments for the delivery of welfare and public services and schemes of the Government. Karira submitted during the hearing that a declaration in the application for UID number obtains the consent of the applicant for such sharing of data. The Respondents stated that such consent is not mandatory, but optional.’’
The CIC also ordered that UIDAI should have adequate number of CPIOs and FAAs to ensure that all applications are disposed off within the relevant time frame. According to CIC, “…there had been a surge in the RTI applications to the UIDAI through the online RTI portal since August-September 2013, and as many as 480 applications were received between August & November 2013…We are surprised that a public authority such as the UIDAI, with widespread public dealings, should have thought it fit to have only one CPIO until recently.”
Reacting on the CIC order, RTI activist Maj Gen SCN Jatar (retd) said, “It is shocking to note that Aadhaar is not used to authenticate LPG gas subsidies. It is only an identifier for a bank and the OMC to ‘match’ the number; there is no way to delete an UID number once allocated; there is no way to delete the biometric and other details of a citizen who wants to "opt out" of Aadhaar; there is no record maintained of who Aadhaar data is shared with and; there is no record maintained of who Aadhaar data is shared with!’’
Here is the order from the CIC…
(Vinita Deshmukh is consulting editor of Moneylife, an RTI activist and convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book “To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte” with Vinita Kamte and is the author of “The Mighty Fall”.)