Allowed

Raja Rajeswari v. Union of India

Madras HC12 Apr 2022WP/8974/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of writ petitions challenging the disqualification of petitioners as directors without prior notice. Relying on a First Bench decision, the court set aside the disqualification, quashed the publication of the disqualified directors list, and ordered reactivation of DINs.

What did the court decide?

Disqualification of directors quashed; publication of list set aside; DINs to be reactivated within 30 days.

Raja Rajeswari Vs Union of India — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 12.04.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶5

W.P.No.8974 of 2022 &

¶6

WMP.Nos.8798, 8799 & 8800 of 2022

¶7

1.Raja Rajeswari

¶8

2.Thangasamy Nadar Raja Chendur Homes Private Limited, 10/27, 45^th Street, 9^th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. ... Petitioners

¶9

¶10

1.Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Shastri Bhawan, Dr.Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-110 001.

¶11

2.The Registrar of Companies, Block No.6, B Wing 2^nd Floor, Shastri Bhawan, 26, Haddows Road, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2^nd Respondent relating to the impugned order dated 18.12.2018 uploaded in the website of the 1^st Respondent in so far as the Petitioners herein are concerned, quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and devoid of merit and consequentially direct the Respondents herein to permit the 1^st Petitioner (having DIN No.6374490) and 2^nd Petitioner (having DIN No.06374494) to get reappointed as Director in the Company or appointed in any other Company without any hindrance.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

For Petitioners : Ms.Savitha .G For Respondents : Mr.E.Perambur Palani, Central Government Standing Counsel

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

Mr.E.Perambur Palani, learned Central Government Standing Counsel accepts notice for the respondents and is armed with instructions to proceed with the matter finally. Hence, by consent expressed by both counsel, this Writ Petition is disposed finally even at the stage of admission.

¶17

Both learned counsel would concur on the position that the issue that arises in this Writ Petition, being the disqualification of the petitioners as the Directors in M/s.Chendur Homes Private Limited, M/s.Chendur Bavan Private Limited and M/s.Chendur Film International Private Limited are liable to be set aside in light of decision of the First Bench of this Court in Meethelaveetil Kaitheri Muralidharan Vs Union of India in W.A.No.569 of 2020 reported in [2020 (7) Mad LJ 641] wherein while considering identical cases of disqualification of Directors without notice, this Court has been pleased to set aside the publication of such list by the Registrar of Companies and the consequent deactivation of Director Identification Number (DIN).

¶18

I have had an occasion to consider the similar issue on 18.02.2022 in W.P.No.2889 of 2022 and applying the aforesaid decision, have passed the following order:

¶19

Mr.K.B.Arul, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel accepts notice for the respondents and is armed with instructions to proceed with the matter finally. Hence, by consent of both counsel, this Writ Petition is disposed finally even at the stage of admission.

¶20

The petitioner is a Director in a company under the name and style of Super Tech Solar System Private Limited. He challenges the records of the second respondent, i.e., the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu, Chennai dated 01.11.2017 read with updated list dated 17.12.2018 uploaded on the website of the 1^st respondent, i.e., Union of India, rep. by its Ministry of Corporate Affairs and quash of the same.

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

The necessity for the challenge at this point of time despite the list having been reflected in the website of R1as early as in 2017 is for the reason that the petitioner seeks reemployment as a Director in another company and the aforesaid disqualification poses a hindrance to the same.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the respondents would admit that such disqualification was without any notice having been issued to the petitioner. In this connection, both the learned counsel drawn my attention to the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Meethelaveetil Kaitheri Muralidharan Vs Union of India in W.A.No.569 of 2020 reported in [2020 (7) Mad LJ 641] wherein while considering identical cases of disqualification of directors without notice, this Court has been pleased to set aside the publication of such list by the Registrar of Companies and the consequent deactivation of Director Identification Number (DIN).

¶24

The operative portion of the decision reads as follows: “...

¶25

In the result, these appeals are allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 27.01.2020. Consequently, the publication of the list of disqualified directors by the ROC and the deactivation of the DIN of the Appellants is hereby quashed. As a corollary to our conclusion on the deactivation of DIN, the DIN of the respective directors shall be reactivated within 30 days of the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Nonetheless, we make it clear that it is open to the ROC concerned to initiate action with regard to disqualification subject to an enquiry to decide the question of attribution of default to specific directors by taking into account the observations and conclusions herein.”

¶26

In light of the identity of facts between the present Writ Petition and in the matters dealt with by the First Bench in the aforesaid batch, the

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶28

same order is taken to be passed in the present Writ Petition as well. The disqualification of the Director stands quashed and consequently, his DIN shall be reactivated within a period of 30 days from today.

¶29

This Writ Petition allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶30

In light of the identity of facts between the present Writ Petition and in the matters dealt with by the First Bench in the aforesaid batch, the same order is taken to be passed in the present Writ Petition as well. The disqualification of the Directors stand quashed and consequently, their DIN shall be reactivated within a period of 30 days from today.

¶31

5.This Writ Petition allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

SD/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶36

vs/ska