Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sukdeb Roy vs The Institute Of Chartered on 9 August, 2021
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
(Through Video Conference)
09.08.2021
serial no. 03
Dd WPA 11607 of 2021
Sukdeb Roy
Vs.
The Institute of Chartered
Accountants of India & Ors.
Mr. Soumya Majumdar
Mr. Soumen Das, Advocates
... ... for the Petitioner
Mr. Rajib Ray, Advocate
... ... for the Respondents
Petitioner complains that the Institute is taking disciplinary proceeding on the basis of the notifications which were struck down by a Hon'ble High Court.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner relies upon an order dated May 18, 2017 passed in WP No. 14118 (W) of 2017 (Pralay Chakraborty vs. The Institute of Chartered Accounts of India & Ors.). He submits that the writ petitioner is similarly situated and circumstanced as that of the writ petitioner in Pralay Chakraborty (supra). Similar order may be passed.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner relies upon an order dated December 9, 2020 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Original Jurisdiction Transfer Petition (Civil) No (S). 2849-2859/2019 (The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India & Ors. vs. Shaji Poulose & Ors.) and submits that the writ petitions which were being pending prior to such order being 2 passed were transferred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He submits that the present writ petitioner should not be discriminated as the petitioner is similarly situated and circumstanced as that of the earlier writ petitioner. Interim orders passed in the matters which were transferred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court were not interfered with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, at the basic minimum, the interim order of stay of the proceeding should be granted.
Learned advocate appearing for the Institute of Chartered Accountants draws the attention of the Court to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated December 9, 2020. He submits that the writ petitions are pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He objects to orders being passed granting any interim orders so far as the writ petitioner is concerned.
There is no doubt that the writ petitioner is similarly situated and circumstanced as that of the writ petitioner of Pralay Chakraborty (supra).
The Hon'ble Supreme Court withdrew the writ petitions mentioned in the order dated December 9, 2020 to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The order dated December 9, 2020 was directed to be transmitted to the respective High Courts also. The order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court directs that the interim order passed in the writ petitions which were transferred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court shall continue till any order is passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. There is nothing on record to suggest that the Hon'ble Supreme Court interfered with the interim orders passed in the writ petitions transferred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
3In the circumstances, since the writ petitioner is similarly situated and circumstanced as that of Pralay Chakraborty (supa) and in view of the order dated December 9, 2020 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it would be appropriate to restrain the Institute from proceeding against the petitioner in any manner whatsoever till the disposal of the present writ petition.
The order dated December 9, 2020 does not direct the present writ petition to be transferred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It would, therefore, appropriate to await the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the issues raised in the present writ petition.
Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within four weeks from date; reply, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter. The writ petition will be treated as ready for hearing immediately on the completion of the time stipulated for filing affidavits.
Liberty to mention.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)