This follows after the industry watchdog found him guilty on 12 out of 28 charges referring to deals concluded during the so-called state capture era.

SAICA said Singh, who refused to testify before its inquiry, would have to carry half the cost of the process that began in late 2019.

The charges against Singh related to the controversial acquisition by Transnet of 1,064 locomotives from China and to the approval of irregular payments while at Eskom to accounting firm KPMG and Trillian, as well as his relationship with the Gupta family and his conduct around the acquisition of the Optimum coal mine by the family's Tegeta Exploration.

The institute found that Singh, among other failings, flouted his duty of care to Transnet with regard to the escalation of the cost of the locomotive contract.

"We accordingly find that Mr Singh had not only failed to exercise due care in committing Transnet to these costs but that he flagrantly ignored the likely loss that Transnet would suffer as a consequence of his approval."

It held that he was grossly negligent in signing of an agreements that saw costs soar.

Regarding the payments of some R30 million to Trillian while at Eskom, the SAICA concluded: "Mr Singh as Eskom's Chief Financial Officer ought to have been more diligent."

Critical to the matter, is the fact that Trillian was paid the money without having rendered any services to the electricity utility.

"Does this lack of due diligence constitute gross negligence as suggested by the Institute? We are of the view that it does. The amounts approved by Mr Singh were in excess of R30 million and the consequences of the payments were that they amounted to irregular expenditure contrary to the Public Finance Management Act. 

"Mr Singh was, to put it mildly, the gatekeeper to Eskom's coffers and his conduct was more than mere carelessness in the circumstances."

The institute did not hold Singh responsible for any wrongdoing relating to the KPMG contract as it was concluded before he was appointed at Eskom.

However, in relation to Eskom's facilitation of Tegeta's acquisition of the Optimum coal mine, Singh had failed to protect his employer's interests.

Moreover, in procuring a guarantee of R1.68 billion in favour of Tegeta, though Eskom was in no position to provide this support and it did not serve the company, this was done without the approval of the minister of public enterprises.

The institute did not find any evidence however that Singh had an improper relationship with the Gupta family.

It concluded that he had been grossly negligent in several respects, and dishonest in at least one.

"Cumulatively though, we find that Mr Singh's conduct and breaches of the lnstitute's Code of Conduct were serious. He held an important position both at Transnet and at Eskom and his conduct resulted in these public institutions suffering substantial financial prejudice. 

"There was a clear lack of accountability and the overall impression we gained was that Mr Singh took decisions on behalf of both entities without thoroughly investigating or considering their ramifications."

Singh offered no evidence in mitigation.

African News Agency