New Delhi: Days after being reinstated as the director of the Tata Sons, Cyrus Mistry on Sunday clearly stated that he has ‘no interest in getting back into the company in any capacity’. This comes days after Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) judgement directing reinstatement of Mistry as the director of the company. Also Read - Tata Sons Moves Supreme Court Against NCLAT Order to Re-appoint Cyrus Mistry as Company Chairman
“I intend to make it clear that despite the NCLAT order in my favour, I will not be pursuing the executive chairmanship of Tata Sons, or directorship of TCS, Tata Teleservices or Tata Industries”, Mistry said in a statement. Also Read - ‘Victory For Principles of Good Governance,’ Asserts Tata Group's Cyrus Mistry on NCLAT Order
He also expressed his gratitude towards NCLAT, which recognized the illegal manner in which he was removed. “I am humbled by the NCLAT order, which after review of the enormous material on record, recognized the illegal manner in which I was removed and the oppressive and prejudicial conduct of Tata and other Trustees”, the former former Tata Sons chief asserted.
Furthermore, he added,”I will however vigorously pursue all options to protect our rights as a minority shareholder, including that of resuming the 30 year history of a seat at the Board of Tata Sons and the incorporation of highest standards of corporate governance&transparency at Tata Sons.”
On December 18, NCLAT had restored Mistry as executive chairman of Tata Sons and ruled that appointment of N Chandrasekaran was “illegal”. In response to this decision, Tata Sons moved the apex court.
Besides, Ratan Tata had on Friday moved the Supreme Court in his personal capacity challenging the NCLAT’s verdict reinstating Cyrus Mistry as Tata Sons Chairman, alleging that in an instance of conflict of interest, Mistry was reluctant to disassociate himself from his family business even after he became the chairman of Tata Sons.
Ratan Tata in his petition to the top court mentioned that disassociation from his family business, the Shapoorji Pallonji Group, was a precondition for Mistry’s appointment as Tata Sons Chairman.
“Amongst the various fronts where Cyrus Mistry’s leadership was lacking was his reluctance to timely and meaningfully disassociate himself from his family business after he became the Chairman of Tata Sons and address any conflict in this regard, which was a condition precedent to his appointment as Chairman of Tata Sons,” Ratan Tata’s petition said.
The petition said that Mistry’s leadership lacked on various fronts and in the months before his replacement the relationship between him and Tata Trusts became discordant. Tata also said that Tata Trusts strongly felt that Mistry could not provide robust leadership to Tata Sons in future.