PETALING JAYA – Pasdec Holdings Bhd’s board is satisfied with the explanation given by group managing director Datuk Mohd Khairuddin Abdul Manan over allegations that he overstepped his authority in executing a mining agreement without the knowledge of the board.

Khairuddin resumed his position on Tuesday following a leave of absence since April 29.

Findings from Pasdec’s investigation into unauthorised mining activities carried out on land belonging to a wholly owned subsidiary Pasdec Corp Sdn Bhd (PCorp) in Kuantan, Pahang (PCSB land), showed that Khairuddin may have failed to comply with the limits of authority in Pasdec when he executed an agreement with a third party in 2014 for the extraction of earth from PCSB land and levelling of the land without it being vetted by the legal department and without the knowledge and approval of the company’s board.

Pasdec said the findings of the forensic audit review carried-out by Messrs Deloitte Corporate Solutions Sdn Bhd were presented to the audit committee.

“The findings of the forensic audit also showed that the deposit and payments received from the third party for carrying out the extraction of earth and levelling works on PCSB land were not recorded as deposit or income in the books of PCorp before being channelled to Kelab Amal Pasdec, a sports and recreation club of the company,” Pasdec said in a stock exchange filing yesterday.

The agreement signed by PCorp is for the third party to undertake extraction of earth and levelling works and not to carry out mining activities.

Following the forensic audit findings, the board had sought legal opinion from Messrs Bastian Vendargon. As recommended by Bastian Vendargon in their legal opinion, the board had carried out due inquiry on the group managing director to ascertain whether or not he was guilty of misconduct and breached his service agreement with regards to the findings of Deloitte.

After undertaking the due inquiry process, the board of Pasdec was satisfied with the explanation and facts provided by the group managing director and the board concluded that the group managing director acted within the limits of authority and duties accorded in his service agreement.