Harish Khurana v. Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 13 Jul 2015 · 2015:DHC:5463-DB
Chief Justice; J. Jayant Nath
W.P.(C) 2776/2014
2015:DHC:5463-DB
corporate petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition as infructuous after a statutory amendment mandated appointment of company secretaries, removing the petition's cause of action.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 2776/2014
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: July 13, 2015
W.P.(C) 2776/2014
HARISH KHURANA ..... Petitioner
Through: Nemo.
VERSUS
MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS & ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Ms.Geeta Sharma along with Mr.Vivek Goyal, Mr.Nishant Piyush and Mr.Vikrmjeet, Advs. for UOI.
Mr.R.D. Makheeja, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
JUDGMENT
Ms.G.Rohini (Chief Justice) (Oral)

1. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It is observed that even on the last occasion none appeared for the petitioner.

2. Ms.Geeta Sharma, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has brought to our notice that the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 have been amended vide Notification dated 09.06.2014 thereby inserting Rule 8A providing for appointment of a whole time Company Secretary in a company not covered under Rule 8 which has a paid up share capital of five crore rupees or more. 2015:DHC:5463-DB W.P.(C) 2776/2014

3. The said Amendment dated 9th June, 2014 reads as under: ‘2. In the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rule, 2014 after rule 8, the following rule shall be inserted, namely:- ‘8A. Appointment of Company Secretaries in companies not covered under rule 8. – A company other than a company covered under rule 8 which has a paid up share capital of five crore rupees or more shall have a whole-time company secretary.’

4. In the light of the said amendment, we are of the view that the cause in the writ petition does not survive. Therefore, the matter requires no adjudication on merits.

5. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.

CHIEF JUSTICE JAYANT NATH, J JULY 13, 2015