9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to file a fresh application notwithstanding the application filed earlier which is pending for consideration. The respondent no.2 may thereafter hold a General Body meeting for removal of petitioner, if the permission to do so is granted by the Central Government (the RD). - W.P.(C) 11225/2016 - - - Dated:- 26-10-2017 - MR. VIBHU BAKHRU J. Petitioner Through Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Mr. Bhagwant Singh, Mr. Mansimran Singh, Ms. Vishakha Ahuja, Advocates. Respondents Through Mrs. Bharati Raju, CGSC for Respondent No. 1/UOI. Mr. Amit Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr. A.S. Chandiok, Senior Advocate with Mr. V.S. Dubey, Mr. Dipender Chauhan, Ms. ramya Kutty, Advocate for Respondent No. 2. O R D E R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anner: Provided that before taking any action under this subsection, the auditor concerned shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 6. In view of the above, RD s jurisdiction was limited to accepting the said application and granting permission to remove the petitioner or rejecting such permission. Notwithstanding the limited scope of the matter before the RD, he was persuaded to pass an order on 04.02.2016, inter alia, directing as under: I. The Respondent will commence the audit w.e.f. 15/02/2016 at 11:00 A.M. onwards at the Registered Office of the Applicant; II. The Applicant will provide all necessary assistance to the Respondent; III. The Respondent will ensure that Audit work will not be held u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith respondent no.2 s application for permission to remove the petitioner as an auditor of the company; which in any case he was required to do. 8. The Court finds no infirmity with the impugned order. As stated above, the jurisdiction of the Central Government (RD as its delegate) is limited to considering the application for permission to remove an auditor prior to expiry of his term. 9. It is noticed that a considerable time has already elapsed and hence, it is directed that the RD shall consider respondent no.2 s application in accordance with law and pass a final order within a period of four weeks from today. 10. The plain reading of the petition also indicates that the petitioner seeks to challenge the maintainability of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
