Setback to Mukesh Ambani on revival of Super Bazar plan

New Delhi, Aug 27 (UNI) In a major setback to the ambitious plan of the Mukesh Ambani-promoted Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) to foray into the consumer retail sector, Indian Labour Cooperative Society (ILC) and Indian Potash Ltd (IPL) have decided to match its bid of Rs 228 crore for revival of the ailing shopping cooperative Super Bazar in the Capital.

Earlier, the duo had offered a bid of Rs 70 crore for the revival of the cooperative society which had been under liquidation since 2002.

The Super Bazar Karamchari Dalit Sangh, which challenged the government's decision to wind up the multi-state cooperative society, had submitted before the Supreme Court that the Reliance's mere announcement to enter retail business could not be construed as having experience in the sector.

Reliance's bid of Rs 288 crore in response to the Government's tender in May 2006 was not in conformity with the tender documents, which violated the Section 33 and Section 67 of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act 2002.

According to the Section 33, the maximum bid for share capital can be 1/5th of the Rs 50 crore, ie, Rs 10 crore. An individual or a company could not hold more than one-fifth of the total equity under the Act.

The evaluation committee constituted by the court was allegedly in favour of the RIL getting the bid on account of its financial capacity and proposed development plan, according to the employees union.

Reliance had proposed to invest Rs 60 crore in the share capital of Super Bazar and another Rs 85 crore for working capital. It had also offered to spend Rs 143 crore to revamp the chain and expand to retailing pharmaceuticals, fruit and vegetables, online shopping and institutional sales.

Union president Jagdish Chaudhary said, "The JPL and JLC have proposed to give benefits to 1025 employees like continuity of services by payment of provident fund for the intervening period which would help us to avail pension benefits." However, the RIL's plan was silent on these issues and the scheme for training employees had been intentionally introduced knowing well that majority of the them were neither qualified nor capable of undergoing stringent training, he added.

UNI PAT YA RS1713