Allowed

Supriyo Gupta and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC9 Apr 2018W.P.(C)/3412/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Bench allowed the writ petition regarding the inclusion of petitioners in a list of disqualified directors. Directions stayed the disqualification, activated DIN/DSC, and permitted filing under the Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018, subject to deposit of fees and filing an affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Stayed inclusion of petitioner in list of disqualified directors; activated DIN/DSC; liberty to apply under CODS 2018 with deposit requirements and affidavit.

Supriyo Gupta and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors. — Company and Corporate | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~51

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3412/2018

¶4

SUPRIYO GUPTA AND ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Ms. Riku Sarma, Adv. with Ms. Anubha Agarwal, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Shiva lakshmi, CGSC with Mr. Siddharth Singh, Mr. Ruchir Ranjan Rai, Advs. for UOI.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 09.04.2018 CM No. 13486/2018

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

W.P.(C) 3412/2018 & CM No. 13485/2018

¶13

In this matter, I am informed by the learned counsel for the official respondents that the issues raised in the captioned matter are similar to those issues which have been raised before Division Bench-I in various matters pending before it.

¶14

Counsel for writ petitioner(s) are agreed that the interim directions passed by this court and those which have been passed by the Division Bench can form the basis of the disposal of the present writ petition with a right to revive the captioned petition, in respect of those issues which are not addressed by the Division Bench judgment.

¶15

Accordingly, the captioned writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶16

(i) The operation of list of disqualified directors in so far as the inclusion of the name(s) of the writ petitioner(s) is concerned, shall remain

¶17

stayed.

¶18

(ii) The DIN and DSC of the writ petitioner(s) will stand activated. (iii) The writ petitioner(s) will have liberty to apply under the Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018 (hereafter “Scheme”). Permission is granted to make the requisite filings in the form of hard copies. (iv) The writ petitioner(s) will deposit, if not already deposited, a sum of Rs.30,000/- qua each such company vis-a-vis whom steps for voluntary striking off are required to be taken. The said amount will be deposited in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) with the Registry of this court on or before 20.04.2018. The FDR will be created in favour of the ROC.

¶19

(v) The amount deposited by way of FDR, as adverted to in clause (iv), will be in addition to other charges that would be payable under the Scheme. These sums will be deposited in the form of FDR as well. The writ petitioner(s) will also furnish their calculations in that behalf.

¶20

The writ petitioner(s) will abide by the Division Bench-I order dated 21.03.2018, passed in a batch of writ petitions, the lead petition being W.P. (C) 9439/2017, titled: Atul Khosla & Anr. v. Union Of India and Ors. 6. Liberty, however, is given both to the petitioner(s) and the official respondents to revive the petition(s), in case, there are issues which are not covered by the Division Bench judgment.

¶21

Needless to say, the disposal of the writ petition will not come in the way of the official respondents presenting their point of view before the Division Bench.

¶22

To be noted, even though counsel for petitioner(s) submitted that they wish to avail of benefit of CODS 2018, the same has not been prayed for in the captioned Writ Petition.

¶23

8.1 Therefore counsel for petitioner(s) will file an affidavit to that effect with registry of this court. The affidavit, interalia, would state that the petitioner(s) would want to avail CODS 2018, and that they have not done business for the past three years and that no bank

¶24

account has been operated.

¶25

8.2 The affidavit shall be filed on or before 20.04.2018.

¶26

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand closed.

¶27

Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

¶28

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

¶29

APRIL 09, 2018 SRwt

Supriyo Gupta and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Supriyo Gupta and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D M Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Trade & Taxes & Anr.

Mohd. Arif and Ors. Vs Kulachi Hansraj Model School and Ors.

Devendra Kumar and Anr. Vs Bal Bharti Public School and Ors.

Master Hardik Sharma (Minor) through His Mother Geeta Sharma Vs Bal Bharti Public School & Anr.

Sudhir Vohra Vs Council of Architecture & Ors.

Ram Chet & Ors. Vs State Bank of India

Dipesh Goswami & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Zakir Husen and Ors. Vs Commissioner of Police and Ors.

Smt Huma Qamar and Anr. Vs Authorization Committee, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital through Chairman and Anr.

Mrs. Majeet Kaur Vs Estate Officer and Ors.

Gulshan Batra & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Rashtriya Virjanand Andh Kanya Vidyalaya Society (Regd) and Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

R. S. Rana Vs C.F.S L through Its Director and Ors.

Zahir Ahmed Vs Sdm Chanakyapuri and Ors.