Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 11481

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, J
Vemula Vamshi Krishna – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
WRIT PETITION Nos. 4790, 4917, 5532, 5545, 5657, 5676, 5882, 5902, 6013, 6188, 6621, 6750, 6846, 7315, 7392, 7475, 7484, 7514, 7515, 7516, 8109, 8119, 8124, 8127, 8131, 8147, 8149, 8158, 8183, 8222, 8272, 8298, 8620, 8625, 8644, 8703, 8803, 8807, 8814, 8833, 8840, 8862, 8912, 8922, 8947, 9014, 9029, 9078, 9088, 9135, 9149, 9195, 9200, 9205, 9234, 9236, 9241, 9245, 9246, 9248, 9268, 9273, 9286, 9303, 9356, 9404, 9406, 9441, 9474, 9568, 9577, 9589, 9595, 9612, 9673, 9692, 9702, 9716, 9733, 9743, 9756, 9765, 9800, 9820, 9832, 9857, 9868, 9875, 9890, 9891, 10034, 10037, 10063, 10067, 10073, 10074, 10113, 10114, 10126, 10731, 10759, 10762, 10811, 10966, 11011, 13570, 13574, 20908, 21020, 21026, 21027, 21103, 21279, 21658, 21860, 21957, 21981, 22209, 22634, 23134, 23063, 23069, 23100, 23138, 25211 OF 2019

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: [List of names]
For the Respondents: Mrs. N.V.R. Rajyalakshmi, Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar

The court reinforced that disqualifications based on inappropriate application of statutory provisions cannot be upheld, ensuring compliance with procedural fairness.

Headnote:(A) Companies Act, 2013 - Section 164 - Director Identification Number (DIN) restoration - Interim directions were issued to restore DINs of petitioners, who are active company directors - Previous orders confirmed this measure and set aside disqualifications imposed on directors - The court upheld the restoration of DINs based on compliance with previous interim orders and procedural grounds. (Paras 2, 6, 31)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court exercises the power of judicial review to ensure that actions of authorities comply with statutory provisions and established procedures - Disqualifications under Section 164(2)(a) were found to be unsustainable based on the facts. (Paras 5, 30)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners are directors seeking the restoration of their DINs which had been deactivated due to disqualification. The interim orders had been complied with before this final judgment.

Findings of Court:
The DINs of the petitioners were restored, and disqualifications under Section 164(2)(a) were set aside, emphasizing the importance of complying with statutory requirements.

Issues: The main issues were whether the deactivation of DINs was justified and the application of statutory provisions regarding directorship.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that disqualifications linked to DIN deactivation cannot stand if they do not comply with statutory requirements, emphasizing procedural fairness and the powers of the court in reviewing administrative actions.

Result: All the writ petitions are allowed.

Table of Content
1. restoration of director identification numbers under statutory compliance. (Para 2)
2. court's consideration of previous orders in similar circumstances. (Para 3 , 4)
3. final ruling allowing the writ petitions. (Para 6 , 8)

COMMON ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel Mrs. N.V.R. Rajyalakshmi, representing the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, for the respondents and perused the material made available on the record. With the consent of both the learned counsel, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal.

2. In all these writ petitions, interim directions were issued to restore the Director Identification Number (DIN) of the petitioners, who are Directors in active companies.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, the Director Identification Number (DIN) of the petitioners was restored and interim orders of this Court are complied with. Subsequently, this Court vide common order dated 11.10.2018 passed in W.P. No.17409 of 2018 and batch disposed of several writ petitions making the interim orders in the writ petitions as final order.

4. It is brought to the notice of this Court that in similar set of facts and circumstances, this Court by common order dated 18.07.2019 passed in W.P. No.5422 of 2108 and batch allowed the writ petitions and thereafter, following the same, several batch of writ petitions were disposed of by way of common order passed in W.P. No.16063 of 2019 dated 29.10.2019 and batch. Hence, it is submitted by the learned counsel on either side that these writ petitions may also be allowed in terms of the common order dated

18.07.2019 passed in W.P. No.5422 of 2018 and batch.

5. For the sake of convenience, relevant paras No.30 to 34 of the common order dated 18.07.2019 passed in W.P. No.5422 of 2018 and batch are extracted hereunder:

“30. In view of the above facts and circumstances and the judgment referred to supra, the deactivation of the DINs of the petitioners for alleged violations under Section

164 of the Act, cannot be sustained.

31. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned orders in the writ petitions to the extent of disqualifying the petitioners under Section 164 (2)(a) of the Act and deactivation of their DINs, are set aside, and the 2^nd respondent is directed to activate the DINs of the petitioners, enabling them to function as Directors other than in strike off companies.

32. It is made clear that this order will not preclude the 2^nd respondent from taking appropriate action in accordance with law for violations as envisaged under Section 164 (2) of the Act, giving the said provision prospective effect from 01.04.2014 and for necessary action against DIN in case of violations of Rule 11 of the Rules.

33. It is also made clear that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in striking off their companies under Section 248 of the Act, they are at liberty to avail alternative remedy under Section 252 of the Act.

34. All the writ petitions are accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above.”

6. Having regard to the fact that the Director Identification Number (DIN) of the petitioners, who are Directors in active companies, is restored in pursuance to the interim order passed in the above writ petitions and also following the common order dated 11.10.2018 passed in W.P. No.17409 of 2018 and batch, common order dated 18.07.2019 passed in W.P. No.5422 of 2018 and batch, and common order dated 29.10.2019 passed in W.P. No.16063 of

2019 and batch, these writ petitions are allowed.

7. The Registry is directed to annexure a copy of the common order dated 18.07.2019 passed by this Court in W.P. No.5422 of

2018 and batch along with this common order.

8. Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document