While the company objected to the appointment of an arbitrator, Justice Jyoti Singh, in an order on October 6, appointed former CJI and retired judge Justice Ramana.

Jain was offered the position of HFEPL CEO in March 2013 and his appointment letter had specified that ESOPs were “scheduled to vest from the date of appointment i.e., April, 2014, to April, 2018, and beyond the year 2018, no time discount would be applied at the time of exercising the ESOPs vested in favour of (Jain)”.

Jain was subsequently appointed as executive director in the company in 2012.

In 2015, an ESOP policy was formulated by HFEPL. In March 2016, Jain was offered 84,00,000 ESOPs at an exercise price of Rs 10, effective from the grant date of October 1, 2015.

However, in March 2018, HFEPL was amalgamated with M/s Clean Solar Power (Hiriyur) Pvt. Ltd. (CSPL) and Jain was informed that all statutory employee benefits and all terms and conditions of employment will stand transferred to CSPL.

Notably, following the amalgamation, the name of CSPL was changed to HFEPL.

Jain resigned from his position as CEO and ED in 2020.

According to Jain, in August 2023, HFEPL issued a letter asking him to accept a cash compensation of Rs 8,00,57,858 purportedly instead of ESOPs under the 2015 Policy, without any basis for the valuation.

As per the 2015 policy’s provision, Jain then invoked arbitration proceedings in June this year.

In July, the company reiterated that the cash compensation was offered correctly and disagreed with the names proposed by Jain for appointment of the Arbitrator. The company also objected to the appointment of arbitrator on the ground that after the amalgamation, a 2025 plan was adopted, which superseded the 2015 policy.

However, Jain has contended that since he resigned in 2020, it is the 2015 policy which would be applicable in his case.

Justice Singh, while agreeing with Jain’s position, also recorded in her order, “In my prima facie view, once (Jain) resigned on 31.08.2020, he will be entitled to benefits under the Policy that was in vogue at that time and not under the Policy which came into effect after the Petitioner resigned and his umbilical cord was broken with the employer.”