This order dismisses the writ petition as infructuous because the High Court found that the final order in the disciplinary complaint, dated 10.02.2023, had already been passed, rendering the prayers obsolete.
The writ petition was disposed of as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~42
SHIV RAJ SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Wadhwa & Ms. Priyanshi Agrawal, Advocates.
versus
THE BOARD OF DISCIPLINE OF ICAI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Advocate for R-1 and 2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
“A. Issue order or direction or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ thereby directing the Respondent No.1 to pronounce its final judgement in the complaint filed by the Petitioner bearing Ref No. PR37/14/DD/69/2014/BOD/379/2017; and/ or
B. Direct the Respondent No.1 to preserve and provide the recording of virtual final hearing dated 26.04.2022 to the Petitioner, as the same contains the acknowledgement of CA Kamal Jain with respect to his mis-conduct.”
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/05/2024 at 12:44:26
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
MAY 6, 2024 hsk
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/05/2024 at 12:44:26
SHIV RAJ SINGH
THE BOARD OF DISCIPLINE OF ICAI
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
