The Union Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) told the Supreme Court today that the extradition of fugitive industrialist Vijay Mallya has not been given effect due to some "secret proceedings" initiated against him in the United Kingdom..The liquor baron was required to appear before the Supreme Court today in relation to the contempt of court case against him. His conviction in the case was confirmed after the dismissal of the review petition on August 31..Today, counsel for the MEA told the Bench of Justices UU Lalit and Ashok Bhushan that even though Mallya's extradition was upheld by the highest court in the UK, it has not been given effect on account of some "secret proceedings" initiated thereafter..When the Court sought to know when these proceedings are likely to conclude, the MEA said that the Government of India has not been made party to these proceedings, and that the nature of these proceedings remains confidential..The Court posed the same question to counsel for Mallya, Ankur Saigal, who claimed to be unaware of the subject and sought time to take instructions..A displeased Court told Saigal that he is expected to be well aware of the facts of the case.."We expect you to be completely aware when you are a counsel before this Court. You are the counsel for the person concerned and once your appearance for a party is recorded, your appearance continues."Supreme Court.The Court ultimately allowed Saigal time to take instructions and apprise it on three questions:What is the nature of the proceedings pending in the UK?When are these proceedings likely to get over?When will the contemnor he appearing before the Court?.The case will be heard next on November 2, at 2 PM..On August 31, the Apex Court had dismissed the review petition filed by Mallya against the order holding him guilty of contempt. The Court had directed the fugitive industrialist to be present before it on October 5 at 2 PM.The Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) was directed to ensure Mallya's presence before the Court..The Court had earlier held Mallya guilty of contempt of court in 2017 for wilfully disobeying its orders in a petition filed by the Consortium of Creditors (CoC) led by the State Bank of India (SBI). Mallya was alleged to have transferred funds into the accounts of other persons in violation of the Court's orders, in addition to making "vague and unclear" disclosures about his assets..Moreover, Mallya was directed to be present before the Court for the hearing on his sentencing, but had failed to do so, considering he had already left India by the time..The Court's 2017 judgment was under review before the Division Bench. In his review petition, Mallya had asserted that the Court had erred in proceeding against him on the basis of an incorrect recording that a reply was not filed by him in response to the banks..It was on this ground that the Court had placed the review petition for hearing before an open court..While dismissing the review petition on August 31, the Court acknowledged the error on its part to have observed and proceeded on the premise that a reply was not filed by Mallya in response to the statements filed by the banks."...the concerned documents including Memo of Filing dated 30.01.2017 and copy of the reply dated 30.01.2017 were placed for our perusal. From these facts it is clear that it was an error on part of this Court to have observed and proceeded on the premise that no reply was filed by respondent No.3 to the response filed by the banks.".Prior to the judgment being reserved, the matter had to be adjourned after it was revealed that a crucial reply filed by Mallya could not be located in the case records with the Court. This, after the Court sought an explanation from its own Registry on June 19 as to why the review petition filed by Mallya was not listed for the last three years.