IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 354 OF 2021 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI R. VASANTH KUMAR S/O SRI. J. RAGHUPATHY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 45/A, ATT COLONY, COIMBATORE-641 018, TAMILNADU.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MUJTABA H.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Digitally signed UDYOG BHAWAN, by SUMA B N NEW DELHI - 110 107, Location: HIGH REPRESENTED BY COURT OF KARNATAKA DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE.

2. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE, KENDRIYA SADAN, 6^TH FLOOR, C AND F WING, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034.

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF FOREIGN TRADE, KENDRIYA SADAN, 6^TH FLOOR, C AND F WING, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034.

4. THE ASSISTANT DGFT/FTDO OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF FOREIGN TRADE, KENDRIYA SADAN, 6^TH FLOOR, C AND F WING, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ADITYA SINGH.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.12.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE R-2 IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 15 OF THE FOREIGN TRADE (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT 1992 AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 22.12.2020 as per Annexure-A passed by respondent No.2 upon the appeal filed by him under Section 15 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1992'), which in turn was necessitated in view of the order dated 30.04.2019 as per Annexure-B, passed by respondent No.3 under Section 13 of the Act, 1992.

2. Case of the petitioner is that he was nominated as Additional Director of a company known as M/s. Ariatex Garments Pvt. Ltd., for a brief period between 24.01.2008 and 15.10.2008, on which date he resigned from his post of Additional Director of the said company. The said company was incorporated in terms of provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, wholly managed and controlled by only two directors namely Sri. Ranjith S. Pillai and Sri. Nishit Harwalkar, who are the directors in charge and responsible for the affairs of the said company. That the petitioner merely had been co-opted as a non-whole time Additional Director without having to do anything with the administration or affairs of the company. He was not assigned with any specific duties or responsibilities either. Subsequent to tendering of his resignation on 15.10.2008, a communication was sent to the Registrar of companies in Form No.DIR-11 as per Annexure-E, which was duly reflected in the Master Data of the Company maintained by the Registrar of companies. Annexure-F is the Master Data, which reflect the tenure of the petitioner as the Additional Director from 24.01.2008 till 15.10.2008. Thus the petitioner had nothing to do with the said company on and after 15.10.2008. Things stood thus, after 11 years of petitioner tendering his resignation he received a show cause notice dated 02.03.2019 from the Officer of the respondent No.4, alleging non-compliance with the provisions of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992 and was asked to appear for the personal hearing on 03.04.2019 to which he had submitted his reply along with the documents in the nature of copy of Form No.DIR-11 as per Annexure-E, bringing to their notice, he having ceased to be the Additional Director after his brief tenure between 24.01.2008 and 15.10.2008. Without even considering said reply, respondent No.2 passed the order, noting that since his name continued in the Registrar of Directors, he would be responsible and would be to prosecuted under provisions of the Foreign Tra