Allahabad High Court
Dharmendra Singh And Another vs The Union Of India And Another on 2 November, 2020
Bench: Shashi Kant Gupta, Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17462 of 2020 Petitioner :- Dharmendra Singh And Another Respondent :- The Union Of India And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurup Dutta Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner had made good the deficiency of Court fee by depositing the deficient amount (i.e Rs. 105/-) in the matter.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Hridaya Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-
"(i) Issue a Direction, Order or Writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing/setting aside the impugned Notice of Respondents, by which Status of DIN of the petitioners are showing disqualified from directorship of active companies M/s RAMJAY AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED & M/s I-CADETS- FOUNDATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, to the extent that it includes the names of the Petitioners DHARMENDRA SINGH and his DIN Number is 01347310, MAYANK SINGH and his DIN Number is 05180929 or."
Upon perusal of the averments made in the writ petition and the documents appended thereto, it transpires that the petitioner is the Director of Evolution Vision Fitness Private Limited 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 Hridaya Narayan Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 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 :- 2.11.2020 vinay