SNC Lavalin officials came, left while on notice
The revelation was made in the petition filed by the company before Kerala High Court.
Kochi: The SNC-Lavalin company, an accused in the controversial Lavalin scandal, had evaded the law over the years by ignoring the summons and court notices issued to it, but its officials had a free access to Kerala and even held discussions with the KSEB officials.
It has come to light that the representatives of SNC- Lavalin company along with their advocates appeared before the Kerala State Electricity Board on December 10, 2014 at Vaidyuthi Bhavanam in Thiruvananthapuram.
The Lavalin officials were forced to visit Kerala to save the company’s face as the government informed them that it had decided to blacklist it.
It was during that meeting that the KSEB said that the only ground being considered for blacklisting was the non-provision of funds for the Malabar Cancer Centre project.
The company had ignored several notices and missed many sittings which delayed the Lavalin case inordinately.
Owing to the non-cooperation of the company, the Thiruvananthapuram CBI Court in 2013 was forced to split the chargesheet excluding sixth accused SNC-Lavalin and ninth accused and its senior vice-president Claus Trendel.
The company and Trendel are yet to be given the chargesheet also. The revelation was made in the petition filed by the company before Kerala High Court.
Even after the visit, it received show-cause notices proposing blacklisting of the company. Though the company claimed that it had replied to the notices, till date it has not filed a proper reply.
Evidently on Friday, Justice Muhammed Mustaque, who considered a petition filed by the company challenging the show-cause notice issued by the state, observed, “it appears the petitioner has not given a reply to the notice.”
State blames cbi for delay in blacklisting
The decision made by the state to blacklist SNC- Lavalin company in connection with the controversial deal has kicked off a debate but the state has defended the action. According to Director-General of Prosecution T. Asaf Ali, the state delayed the move to blacklist it as the CBI filed the chargesheet only in 2009.
According to him, law has to take its own course and the government has been sending repeated notices to the company proposing to blacklist it.
“The state cannot rely on the Comptroller and Audit General's report alone before going ahead with the decision. The CBI after conducting a thorough investigation decided to file the chargesheet. The chargesheet was not issued to them owing to non-cooperation of the accused, the company and its senior vice-president Claus Trendel,” said Mr Asaf Ali.
The company, however, rejected the move to blacklist it by moving the High Court. According to it, “it is arbitrary to allow the company to continue with a summary procedure of blacklisting for a purported breach when in over 15 years no legal action under the contract has been preferred.”