Samir Kumar Das vs Securities And Exchange Board Of India And Others

Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer

The appellant being aggrieved by the disposal of his complaint on the Securities and Exchange Board of India Complaint Redressal System (hereinafter referred to as ‘SCORES’) by the communication dated June 7, 2022 has filed the present appeal.

The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal is, that the appellant was an employee of ICICI Bank Ltd. respondent nos. 2 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ICICI Bank’). As per whistleblower policy of the respondent nos. 2, the appellant became a whistleblower alleging harassment and victimization from respondent nos. 2. The appellant filed a complaint on January 8, 2019 on the SCORES platform alleging victimization, harassment by impeding his career and making illegal transfer to ICICI Bank foundation by respondent nos. 2.

Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) after investigation found that respondent nos. 2 failed to provide appropriate protection against victimization of the appellant and accordingly a show cause notice was issued to respondent nos. 2 for violation of Regulation 22(2) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ‘LODR Regulations’).

Proceedings against respondent nos. 2 resulted in a settlement under Securities and Exchange Board of India (Settlement of Administrative and Civil Proceedings) Regulations, 2014 and, consequently, by an order dated January 19, 2021, on payment of Rs. 28,40,625/-, the matter was settled by SEBI with respondent nos. 2.

The appellant not being satisfied requested SEBI that he being the principal subject of the settlement and being a victim of harassment and victimization by respondent nos. 2, SEBI should direct respondent nos. 2 to permanently restrain respondent nos. 2 from denying the allegations as alleged in the settlement order, namely, that respondent nos. 2 had violated the Code of Ethics while victimizing and harassing the appellant and the offer provided to the appellant by respondent nos. 2 was detrimental to his interest and his banking career.

By the impugned order, the complaint of the appellant was closed on the ground that the dispute appears to be a private dispute with ICICI Bank which cannot be dealt with on the SCORES platform.

We have heard the appellant in person through video conference and, upon a perusal of the records, we find that the complaint of the appellant was dealt with under the LODR Regulations for alleged violation of Regulation 22(2) of the LODR Regulations which resulted into a settlement between SEBI and respondent nos. 2.

Such alleged violation cannot be forced upon respondent nos. 2 to be an admission of the violation on their part. No such directions can be issued by this Tribunal or by SEBI once settlement proceedings have been concluded. Consequently, any difference regarding contractual obligation between the appellant and respondent nos. 2 is clearly a private dispute between the two parties for which no SEBI laws are involved and, consequently, no relief can be granted to the appellant.

For the reasons stated aforesaid, we do not find any error in the disposal of the complaint by SEBI on the SCORES platform. The appeal fails and is dismissed.

This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary on behalf of the bench and all concerned parties are directed to act on the digitally signed copy of this order. Certified copy of this order is also available from the Registry on payment of usual charges.