THE Shah Alam High Court has set February 22 to decide on an application filed by former Selangor menteri besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim and the state government to strike out a RM14 billion suit filed by Puncak Niaga Holdings Bhd over the restructuring of the state’s water industry.

Judge Akhtar Tahir set the date after hearing further submissions from the plaintiff, Puncak Niaga, and the two defendants on two issues today.

The two issues were: whether the principle of law relating to tort of misfeasance in public office applies when Malaysia has the Government Proceedings Act 1956, and clarification on the meaning of “public official”.

Earlier, lawyer Gopal Sreenevasan, representing Puncak Niaga, submitted that the interpretation of “public official” as stated in the Government Proceedings Act and Interpretation Act 1967 could not be applied in the application, as the country had a Common Law to fall back on.

Lawyer Nik Suhaimi Nik Sulaiman, representing the Selangor government, submitted that it was not wrong to define “public official” using the Interpretation Act, as the plaintiff’s claim involved misfeasance in public office.

“The menteri besar or prime minister is not included in the ‘civil servant holding public office’ category because the post does not come under ‘Public Services’ as defined in Article 132 of the federal constitution.

“On the Government Proceedings Act, it applies to us (state government) because the plaintiff made a claim against us based on vicarious liability.”

In November and December last year, Khalid and the Selangor government each filed an application to strike out the suit by the water supply company, which also named current Menteri Besar Mohamed Azmin Ali as a defendant.

In his application, Khalid said he believed that the plaintiff’s action against him was an allegation of misfeasance in public office.

He claimed that at all material times, he was not a public official under relevant laws, such as the Government Proceedings Act, Interpretation Act 1948 and 1967, state constitution and federal constitution.

The state government, on the other hand, stated that the plaintiff’s action against it under the Government Proceedings Act was a misconception in law, besides the fact that the plaintiff had no locus standi to proceed with the suit.

In the suit filed on October 27 last year, Puncak Niaga claimed that Khalid and Azmin had abused their power by threatening to cause the federal government to invoke the Water Services Industry Act 2006, to force the takeover of the water services industry in Selangor.

The company is claiming damages, interest and costs over the loss of business opportunities in the country and abroad, totalling RM13.5 billion.

It is also seeking damages, interest on damages and cost of the difference between the value of PNSB Water Sdn Bhd – formerly known as Puncak Niaga (M) Sdn Bhd – and Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Sdn Bhd, within the range of RM2.08 billion to RM2.35 billion.

The company is seeking actual purchase consideration of RM1.56 billion under the share purchase agreement dated November 11, 2014, between Puncak Niaga and Pengurusan Air Selangor Sdn Bhd. – Bernama, January 26, 2018.