Majority of Adani group stocks trade lower for 2nd day; Adani Green tumbles 11 pc
New Delhi (PTI): Shares of eight of the ten listed Adani group firms were trading lower during the morning trade on Friday after billionaire Gautam Adani was charged by US prosecutors for allegedly being part of a scheme to pay USD 265 million (about Rs 2,200 crore) bribe to Indian officials in exchange for favourable terms for solar power contracts. Adani Green Energy dropped 10.95 per cent and Adani Energy Solutions tumbled 8.57 per cent to hit the 52-week low of Rs 637.85 on the BSE.
The stock of the group's flagship firm, Adani Enterprises, slumped 6.98 per cent to hit its 52-week low of Rs 2,030.
Shares of Adani Power tanked 6.38 per cent, Adani Total Gas went lower by 6.11 per cent, Adani Ports declined 5.31 per cent, Adani Wilmar plunged 5.17 per cent to hit the one-year low of Rs 279.20 and NDTV dipped 3.41 per cent.
In contrast, ACC and Ambuja Cements were trading over 2 per cent higher even after falling in the opening deals.
In the equity market, the BSE benchmark Sensex quoted 781.02 points higher at 77,936.81 and the NSE Nifty climbed 228.90 points to 23,578.80.
Shares of Adani group firms fell sharply on Thursday.
The stock of Adani Enterprises had plunged 22.61 per cent, Adani Energy Solutions tanked 20 per cent, Adani Green Energy plummeted 18.80 per cent, Adani Ports dived 13.53 per cent, Ambuja Cements cracked 11.98 per cent, and Adani Total Gas tumbled 10.40 per cent on the BSE.
Shares of Adani Wilmar declined 9.98 per cent, Adani Power slumped 9.15 per cent, ACC fell 7.29 per cent, and NDTV dipped 0.06 per cent.
Adani group on Thursday denied charges of paying bribes to secure favourable terms for solar power contracts, saying the allegations by US prosecutors are baseless and the conglomerate is compliant with all laws.
It said all possible legal recourse will be sought.
"The allegations made by the US Department of Justice and the US Securities and Exchange Commission against directors of Adani Green are baseless and denied," the group spokesperson said in a statement.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Unreserved vacancies for candidates with disabilities open for all categories: SC
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday said "unreserved" vacancies for Persons with Disabilities (PWD) are an open pool where merit remains the decisive factor and that eligible candidates belonging to any social or special category can be employed.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh set aside a judgement of the Calcutta High Court, saying the "unreserved" category is not a separate "social category" but an open field for all.
It held that a more meritorious PWD candidate belonging to a reserved category like OBC, SC, or ST cannot be barred from an unreserved PWD post simply because a candidate from the "General" category is also available.
"In reservation law, it is well settled that the Unreserved/Open category does not refer to any social/communal category like SCs, STs or OBC. In other words, any post falling under the Unreserved or Open category does not pertain to any particular social category, it provides an open field or pool meant for the world at large, in the sense that it is open to all candidates, irrespective of whether one belongs to any social or special category or not," Justice Singh, who authored the verdict, said.
The court said if an unreserved or open post is meant for the special category of Persons with Disabilities, it means that the said post will be open to all candidates of all vertical social categories, whether Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs) or Other Backward Classes (OBC), provided such candidates are also PWD.
"Thus, all candidates, whether SC, ST or OBC, but who are Persons with Disabilities, are equally entitled to compete for the post meant for Persons with Disabilities falling under the Unreserved category, the rationale being that all those who are similarly situated must be treated equally," it said.
The case arose from a recruitment drive of the West Bengal State Electricity Transmission Company Limited (WBSETCL) for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade-II.
The notification included one post specifically earmarked for Unreserved (Persons with Disabilities -- Low Vision).
The controversy involved two candidates, an unreserved category candidate with low vision who scored 55.667 marks and an OBC candidate, also with low vision, who scored 66.667 marks.
The WBSETCL appointed the OBC candidate to the post based on his higher merit.
This was challenged by the general category candidate who said since he was a "qualified unreserved candidate", the vacancy should have gone to him and that reserved category candidates should only be considered if no unreserved PWD candidate is available.
While a single-judge bench of the high court dismissed the plea, a division bench reversed that decision, directing the employer to appoint the less-meritorious unreserved candidate.
The WBSETCL had then appealed to the Supreme Court.
