9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 163 - HC - Companies LawDirections to respondents to permit the petitioners to get reappointed as Directors of any Company or appointed in any other Company without any hindrance - HELD THAT - The issue involved in these writ petitions is no more a res integra. It is to be stated that the Registrar of Companies (RoC) has been disqualifying the Directors under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 by order dated 08.09.2017. Another list was published in the website of the first respondent on 01.11.2017 disqualifying the Directors. Yet another list of Directors were disqualified on 17.12.2018 by the RoC. Petition allowed.
Issues:
Challenge to order disqualifying directors under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 and seeking reappointment without hindrance. Analysis: The writ petitions challenged the order disqualifying directors under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013. The RoC had been disqualifying directors through various notifications, leading to legal challenges. A significant judgment in Bhagavan Das case set aside earlier notifications/orders disqualifying directors. However, a subsequent notification dated 17.12.2018 faced challenges but was dismissed by the Court. A batch of writ appeals, including W.A.No.569 of 2020, further addressed the powers of the RoC under Sections 164 and 167(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 and related rules. The Division Bench analyzed the Rules regarding Director Identification Number (DIN) and concluded that the RoC lacked the authority to deactivate DIN upon disqualification under Section 164(2) of the Act. The Division Bench's ruling in W.A.No.569 of 2020 allowed the appeals, quashing the impugned order and directing reactivation of DIN for the directors within 30 days. The judgment emphasized that while DIN reactivation was ordered, the RoC could still initiate action for disqualification after an inquiry to attribute specific defaults to directors. The decision aligned with the principles outlined in the Companies Act, 2013 and related rules. Following this precedent, the present writ petitions were allowed based on the earlier judgment, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed without costs.
|
