Delhi High Court
Mohammad Aftab Alam vs Union Of India And Anr. on 18 April, 2018
$~49
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Pronouncement: 18.04.2018
+ W.P.(C) 3840/2018 & CM APP Nos.15216-17/2018
MOHAMMAD AFTAB ALAM ..... Petitioner
Through : Ms. Arunima Dwivedi and
Ms. Preeti Kumra, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. .... Respondents
Through : Mr. Rajesh Gogna, CGSC
with Mr. Akhilesh Kumar,
Adv. for R-1&2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J (ORAL)
CM APP No.15217/2018
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 3840/2018 & CM APP No.15216/2018
2. Issue notice to the respondents. Mr. Rajesh Gogna accepts
notice on behalf of the respondents.
2.1 Mr.Gogna says that in view of the order that I propose to
pass today, he does not wish to file a counter affidavit in the
matter.
3. Briefly the petitioner's case is that he was appointed as
Director on the Board of Company by the name of Amenity
Trading Private Limited (in short ATPL). The petitioner avers that
he resigned from ATPL on 1.10.2011. For this purpose, reliance is
placed on Annexure P-1, which is appended at page 38 of the paper
book.
3.1 Furthermore, in support of this submission, reliance is also
placed on a typed copy of the Board of Director resolution dated
1.10.2011, which is appended at page 39 of the paper book.
3.2 This apart, petitioner also places reliance on a letter dated
1.10.2011 issued by the then Director of ATPL. This letter is
appended at page 40 of the paper book.
3.3 The petitioner has also averrs that apart from being
appointed as Director of ATPL, at the moment, he is also acting as
a Director for the Company by the name of RBAS Global Trading
Private Limited (in short RGTPL).
3.4 It is averred that the RGTPL is fully active and functional.
4. It appears that the other Directors on the Board of ATPL did
not ensure that financial statements and requisite statutory returns
qua ATPL are filed; a situation which resulted in its name being
removed from the Register of Companies.
5. Apparently, though, the Board of Directors of ATPL
accepted the resignation of the petitioner, they did not
communicate this information to the Registrar of Companies
(ROC) which resulted in his name being included in the list of
disqualified directors of companies for the year 2012-2014
(Annexure P-4).
6. Given these circumstances, the petitioner has approached
this court. Mr. Gogna, who appears on advance notice for the
official respondents says that the petitioner's case could be
remitted to the ROC, who after examining the documents placed on
record would pass a speaking order.
7. I find merit in the submission advanced by Mr. Gogna.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following
directions:
(i) Petitioner will appear before the Registrar of Companies on
26.4.2018 at 03:00 p.m.. The ROC will grant personal hearing to
the petitioner. Thereafter the ROC will pass a speaking order; copy
of which will be furnished to the counsel for the petitioner. In case
the petitioner is still aggrieved by the order passed by ROC, he will
have the liberty to assail the same in the manner known to law.
(ii) Pending the aforesaid exercise, the operation of the
impugned list of Directors (Annexure P-4) shall remain stayed
insofar as the petitioner is concerned. Furthermore, the DIN and
DSC number of the petitioner will also be activated by the ROC.
(iii) The Registrar of Companies will have the authority to either
extend the aforesaid interim facility granted to the petitioner
pending disposal of the matter by him or withdraw the same if the
situation demands taking such an action.
8. Dasti.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
APRIL 18, 2018
mk
