Case Law Details
Jai Shankar Agrahari Vs Union Of India And Another (Allahabad High Court)
Allahabad High Court held thaty there is no provision which empowers ROC to de-activate DIN, only on the ground that a Director has incurred disqualification under Section 164(2) (a) or his Office has become vacant under Section 167(1) (a). It also quashes List of disqualified directors published by ROC in public gazette.
In this regard relevant extract of the judgments of different High Courts may be reproduced as under :
(1) Delhi High Court’s judgment in Mukut Pathak (supra), paragraphs 106, 108, 109 and 110:
“106. Neither any of the provisions of the Companies Act nor the Rules framed thereunder stipulate cancellation or deactivation of DIN on account of a director suffering a disqualification under Section 164(2) of the Act. It is relevant to note that Rule 11 of the Company (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014 was amended with effect from 05.07.2018 to provide for deactivation of DIN in the event of failure to file Form DIR-3-E-KYC within the period as stipulated under Rule 12A of the said Rules. The amendment so introduced also does not empower the Central Government to cancel or deactivate the DIN of disqualified directors.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
