Dismissed

N. Narasimhan v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Ors.

Delhi HC5 Apr 2024W.P.(C)/3802/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench disposed of a writ petition challenging a disciplinary order. Holding that an appeal to the Authority under Section 22G of the Chartered Accountants Act is an equally efficacious alternate remedy, the Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction at this juncture. The writ was dismissed with liberty to approach the appropriate authority.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to approach the appropriate authority; pending applications disposed of.

N. Narasimhan Vs Institute of Chartered… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~10

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3802/2024 & CM APPL. 15605/2024

¶4

N. NARASIMHAN ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. K.V. Balakrishnan, Mr. Devesh Khanduri, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Febin Mathew Varghese, Mr. Dhiraj Philip, Ms. Srishti Agarwaal, Advocates for R-1.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶9

O R D E R % 05.04.2024

¶10

The Petitioner has approached this Court challenging an Order dated 05.02.2024, passed by the Disciplinary Committee constitute under Section 21B of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, holding the Petitioner guilty of misconduct and for violating Clause 5, 7 & 8 of Part – I of the Second Schedule of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.

¶11

It is the case of the Petitioner that the principles of Natural Justice has been violated in the impugned Order. It is also the contention of the Petitioner that the Presiding Officer had first recused himself from the matter, however, he had later on chosen to pass the impugned order. An affidavit of the Counsel for the Petitioner in the Disciplinary proceedings has also been filed to this effect.

¶12

Section 22G of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 provides for an appeal. Section 22G reads as under:

¶13

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 09/04/2024 at 12:44:48

¶14

“ 22G. Appeal to Authority.—(1) Any member of the Institute aggrieved by any order of the Board of Discipline or the Disciplinary Committee imposing on him any of the penalties referred to in sub-section (3) of section 21A and sub-section (3) of section 21B, may within ninety days from the date on which the order is communicated to him, prefer an appeal to the Authority:

¶15

Provided that the Director (Discipline) may also appeal against the decision of the Board of Discipline or the Disciplinary Committee to the Authority, if so authorised by the Council, within ninety days:

¶16

Provided further that the Authority may entertain any such appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time.

¶17

(2) The Authority may, after calling for the records of any case, revise any order made by the Board of Discipline or the Disciplinary Committee under subsection (3) of section 21A and sub-section (3) of section 21B and may—

¶18

(a) confirm, modify or set aside the order;

¶19

(b) impose any penalty or set aside, reduce, or enhance the penalty imposed by the order;

¶20

(c) remit the case to the Board of Discipline or Disciplinary Committee for such further enquiry as the Authority considers proper in the circumstances of the case; or

¶21

(d) pass such other order as the Authority thinks fit: Provided that the Authority shall give an opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned before passing

¶22

¶23

any order.]”

¶24

Learned Counsel appearing for the Institute submits that arguments on punishment to be imposed on the Petitioner have been heard and judgment has been reserved.

¶25

A perusal of Section 22G of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 shows that there is an equally efficacious alternate remedy to the Petitioner against the Order passed by the Disciplinary Committee. All the contentions raised by the Petitioner in the present Writ Petition can be agitated by the Petitioner before the Appellate Authority.

¶26

In view of the fact that an equally efficacious alternate remedy is available to the Petitioner, this Court is not inclined to exercise its Writ jurisdiction at this juncture.

¶27

Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to approach the appropriate authority in accordance with law. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶28

It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the Petitioner are left open. If and when and as and when the Petitioner approaches the Appellate Authority, the Appellate Authority is directed to consider the appeal of the Petitioner on its own merits uninfluenced by the fact that the present Writ Petition has not been entertained by this Court.

¶29

It is also made clear that this Court has not made any observations on the merits of the case.

¶30

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶31

APRIL 5, 2024 Rahul

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 09/04/2024 at 12:44:48

N. Narasimhan v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N. Narasimhan v. Institute of Chartered Accountants 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Itc Limited Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Prakritishri Aldaan & Anr. Vs Deepika Mittal

Delhi Jal Board Contractors Welfare Association Regd. Vs Delhi Jal Board & Anr.

Devendra Kumar Sharma Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 13-1, & Ors.

Telenor South Asia Investment Pte Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Shashwata Dashora Vs Jamia Millia Islamia

Food Corporation of India Khanauri, Sangrur (Pb.) Vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Bathinda (Pb.)

Meenakshi & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Prakritishri Aldaan & Anr. Vs Deepika Mittal

Anil Naagar Vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

M/S Peasfill Servoces Vs ONGC Videsh Limited & Anr.

Chand Mehra Vs Union of India & Ors.

Smt Kamla Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Jeetu Kanwar Vs Union of India & Ors.