Allahabad High Court
Mehindi Wazir vs Registrar Of Companies And Another on 27 January, 2020
Bench: Bala Krishna Narayana, Ravi Nath Tilhari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2735 of 2020 Petitioner :- Mehindi Wazir Respondent :- Registrar Of Companies And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Fahim Ahmed Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Hon'ble Ravi Nath Tilhari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Solicitor General of India for respondent no. 1 and Sri Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-
"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the press release / impugned notices dated 6.9.2017 and 12.9.2017 passed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 (Annexure No. 1 and 2 to the writ petition) respectively; and/or
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing / set aside the list of disqualified directors (hereinafter referred as "said list") to the extent that it includes the names of the petitioners; and/or
(iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioners the respondents to allow the petitioners to use their Digital signature certificate and Director Identification Number; and / or
(iv) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to ensure that the petitioners are not prevented from being appointed as Directors of 'active' companies other than the defaulting company.
(v) Issue any other writ, order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case
(vi) Award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner."
Upon perusal of the averments made in the writ petition and the documents appended thereto, it transpires that the petitioner is the Director of Embellish Exim Private Litmited and by the impugned circulars dated 06.09.2017 and 12.09.2017 issued by the respondent no. 2, he has been disqualified along with Directors of several other companies. The name of the petitioner was uploaded on the website of respondent no. 1 (Annexure 3 to the writ petition). The aforesaid action appears to have been taken by the respondent no. 2 in the exercise of his power under Section 164(2)(a) of The Companies Act, 2013.
The action of the respondent no. 2 has been challenged on the ground that the same is unconstitutional, irrational, unreasonable and manifestly arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
Record further shows that the same issue which is involved in the instant writ petition was the subject matter of the bunch of writ petitions, leading petition whereof, was Writ-C No. 12498 of 2019 (Jata Shankar Agrahari Vs. Union of India And Another) which were partly allowed by a common judgment and order dated 16.1.2020 passed by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this writ petition may also be disposed of on the same terms and conditions, subject to which, Writ C No. 12498 of 2019 (Jata Shankar Agrahari Vs. Union of India And Another) and other connected writ petitions, were decided.
Sri Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of on the same terms and conditions, subject to which, Writ-C No. 12498 of 2019 (Jata Shankar Agrahari Vs. Union of India And Another) and other connected writ petitions, were decided and partly allowed by a common judgment and order dated 16.1.2020 passed by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
Order Date :- 27.1.2020 HR