Institute of Company Secretaries of India Versus Biman Debnath & Ors.

Institute of Company Secretaries of India  Versus Biman Debnath & Ors.

Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8039 OF 2022

Institute of Company Secretaries of India       …Appellant 

Versus

Biman Debnath & Ors.     …Respondents

With

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8040­41 OF 2022

Anil Kumar Dubey          …Appellant 

Versus

Biman Debnath & Ors.     …Respondents

J U D G M E N T

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling   aggrieved   and   dissatisfied   with   the   impugned

judgment and order dated 13.04.2022 passed by the High Court

1

of Judicature at Calcutta in MAT No.213 of 2022 and MAT 219 of

2022 with CAN 1 of 2022 by which the High Court has dismissed

the   said   appeal   and   has   confirmed   the   judgment   and   order

passed by the learned Single Judge by which the learned Single

Judge allowed the writ petition bearing No.WPA 1367 of 2022 by

quashing and setting aside the election of the office bearers of the

Regional Council for the year 2022 held in the 316th Meeting of

Eastern   India   Regional   Council   of   the   Institute   of   Company

Secretaries of India, the Institute of Company Secretaries of India

has preferred the present appeal. 

2. Notice dated 20.12.2021 was issued for elections to be held

on 27.12.2021 for the Eastern India Regional Council (hereinafter

referred to as ‘EIRC’) of Institute of Company Secretaries of India

(hereinafter referred to as ‘ICSI’) to take effect from 19.01.2022 for

the period of one year.  The meeting of the Regional Council was

required to be chaired by the Chairman, EIRC.  However, before

the actual date of election on 27.12.2021, the Chairman, EIRC

was disqualified to hold his office on 22.12.2021.  Thus, the office

of the Chairman fell vacant in terms of Regulation 117(2) of the

2

Company Secretaries Regulations, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as

“Regulations 1982’).   As the post of Chairman fell vacant, the

same was required to be filled in for the remaining period in

terms of Regulation 119(2).  The contesting respondent herein as

a Vice Chairman was allowed to chair the meeting for the limited

purpose of election to the post of Chairman for the remaining

period   of   current   year   ending   on   18.01.2022   in   terms   of

Regulation 119(2).   The contesting respondent no.1 herein as a

Vice­Chairman was allowed to chair the meeting for the limited

purpose of election to the post of Chairman for the remaining

period  of  the  current  year ending  on  18.01.2022  in  terms  of

Regulation 119(2).  It appears that the contesting respondent no.1

was disrupting the meeting, the remaining members decided to

proceed with the agenda item i.e. electing the chairman for the

remaining period and for that purpose appointed respondent no.3

– Mr. Anil Kumar Dubey to chair the said item.  That thereafter

elections took place and the respondent no.3 – Mr. Anil Kumar

Dubey was duly elected as Chairman for the remaining period.

3

2.1 He was elected for the period 19.01.2022 to 18.01.2023.

The   Respondent   no.1   who   did   not   participate   in   the   election

and/or contest filed the writ petition before the learned Single

Judge contending  inter alia  that the meeting dated 27.12.2021

chaired by Respondent no.3 was illegal.  According to Respondent

no.1,   in   absence   of   the   Chairman,   the   Vice­Chairman   would

become the Chairman and therefore the meeting was required to

be chaired by him.   However, it was the case on behalf of the

Institute and the contesting original respondents that meeting

was   convened   legally   and   the   Chairman   was   elected   for   the

remaining period as per Regulation 119(2) of the Regulations,

1982.  It was the specific case on behalf of the contesting original

respondents that it was a case of vacation of office and not the

absence of an office bearer for a particular period of time.  The

learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and set aside the

elections  of   the  office bearers  elected  in  the   meeting  held  on

27.12.2021   mainly   on   the   ground   that   the   meeting   was   not

chaired by the Vice­Chairman who in absence of the Chairman

was required to conduct and/or chair the meeting as Chairman.

4

The Judgment and Order passed by the learned Single Judge has

been   confirmed   by   the   impugned   judgment   and   order   of   the

Division Bench of the High Court.  Hence, the present appeal at

the instance of the ICSI.

3. We have heard Shri Sanjiv Sen, learned Senior Advocate

appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri Ritin Rai, learned

Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the contesting respondent

no.1.  We have gone through the impugned judgment and order

passed by the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench

of the High Court.

4. From the judgment and order passed by the learned Single

Judge   confirmed   by   the   Division   Bench   of   the   High   Court   it

appears that the learned Single Judge quashed and set aside the

election of the office bearers of the EIRC on the ground that the

meeting was not presided over by the Vice­Chairman (Respondent

no.1 herein).   Therefore, the short question which is posed for

consideration is as to whether the meeting i.e. 21.07.2021 was

presided over by the person duly elected as Chairman for the

remaining period?

5

4.1 While considering the aforesaid issue relevant provisions of

the   Regulations   1982   are   required   to   be   referred   to   namely

Regulations 92, 117 & 119 which are as under:

“92. Chairman of the Council.­  At all meetings of the

Council,   the   President,   and   in   his   absence   the   VicePresident shall be the Chairman; in the absence of both,

the members present shall elect one of the their number

to be the Chairman of meeting. 

Provided that, at the first meeting of any Council the

President of the outgoing Council, or in his absence its

Vice­President,   shall   act   as   the   Chairman   until   such

time a President is elected under the provisions of subsection (1) of section 12. 

Provided   further   that   in   the   absence   of   both   the

President and the Vice president of the outgoing Council

the members of the Council present shall elect one of the

members to be the Chairman of the meeting until such

time a President is elected under the provisions of subsection (1) of section 12.”

***

“117.  Vacancies.­  (1) A member of a Regional Council

may at any time resign his membership by writing under

his hand  addressed to  the  Chairman  of the Regional

Council   and   the   seat   of   such   member   shall   become

vacant when such resignation is notified in the Journal

or when the Regional Council next meets, whichever is

earlier. 

(2) An elected member of a Regional Council who has

been   found   guilty   of   any   professional   or   other

misconduct   and   awarded   penalty   of   fine   or   does   not

attend   three   consecutive   meetings   of   the   Regional

6

Council or Committee thereof, unless he applies for leave

of absence in writing and it is granted for each meeting,

shall be deemed to have vacated office from the date of

the   order   or   at   the   conclusion   of   the   third   meeting

unless he applies for leave of absence in writing and it is

granted for each meeting.

(3)   Any   vacancy   caused   by   the   resignation,   death   or

removal from the Register of an elected member of the

Regional Council may be fi by the Regional Council by

co­option   of   another   member   entitled   to   vote   in   and

stand   for   election   to   the   Regional   Council   with   the

approval of the President. 

(4)  If  a member  of  the  Regional   Council  [including  a

member   of   the   Council   becoming   a   member   of   the

Regional Council under clause (a) of sub­regulation (2) of

Regulation 111] changes his professional address from

the regional constituency to which he belonged to at the

time of election or co­option, as the case may be, to

another regional constituency, such member shall cease

to be member of that Regional Council from that date.

The vacancy so caused may be filled by the Regional

Council by co­option of another member in the same

manner as provided in sub­regulation (3). 

(5) In the case of a member of a Regional Council being

elected to the Council, without prejudice to his right to

be represented on the Regional Council under clause (a)

of sub­regulation (2) of Regulation 111, he shall cease to

be an elected member of the Regional Council and the

vacancy thus caused may be filled up by co­options by

the   Regional   Council   in   the   manner   set   out   in   subregulation (3). (6) A co­opted member shall hold office as

a member of the Regional Council for the duration of

office of that Regional Council.” 

***

7

“119. Proceedings  of the Regional Council.­ (1) Onethird of the members of the Regional Council for the time

being shall constitute the quorum. 

(2) Every Regional Council shall at its first meeting held

after   its   constitution   and   in   subsequent   years   at   a

meeting to be held in December of every year elect from

amongst its members a Chairman, a Vice­Chairman, a

Secretary and a Treasurer thereof to hold office for a

period commencing from the date of its first meeting

after constitution or from 1st January of the subsequent

year as the case may be, till the 31st December of that

year and so often as any of those offices become vacant,

the   Regional   Council   shall   elect   another   person   from

amongst its members to hold the office for the remaining

period of a year.

Provided that the retiring office bearers shall be eligible

for   re­election   to   any   of   the   offices   of   the   Regional

Council if they continue to be members of the Regional

Council. 

(3) The first meeting of the Regional Council referred to

in sub­regulation 

(2) shall be called and held within one month from the

date of its constitution 70[* * * * * *]. 

(4) If within half an hour from the time appointed for the

said first meeting of the Regional  Council referred to

hereinbefore, a quorum as mentioned in sub­regulation

(1)   above   is   not   present,   the   said   first   meeting   shall

notwithstanding anything contained in that Regulation

stand adjourned to the same day in the next week at the

same time and place and at such adjourned meeting of

the Regional Council, the member or members present,

shall constitute the quorum and shall have power to

transact all the business which could properly have been

transacted at the original meeting.” 

8

4.2 Regulation 117 deals with the vacancies.  As per Regulation

117(2)  an   elected   member  of   Regional   Council   who  has   been

found guilty of any professional or other misconduct……., shall

be deemed to have vacated office from the date of the order.  In

the present case the then Chairman, EIRC was disqualified to

hold his office on 22.12.2021.  Therefore, it was a case of vacation

of office of the Chairman.  

4.3 Regulation 119 deals with the Proceedings of the Regional

Council.  As per Regulation 119(2) every Regional Council shall at

its first meeting held after its constitution and in subsequent

years at a meeting to be held in December of every year elect from

amongst its members a Chairman, a Vice­Chairman, a Secretary

and a Treasurer thereof to hold office for a period commencing

from the date of its first after constitution or from 1st January of

the subsequent year as the case may be till the 31st December of

that  year and so often as any of those offices become vacant, the

Regional  Council  shall elect  another person from amongst its

members to hold the office for the remaining period of a year.

Thus,   as   the   office   of   the   Chairman   fell   vacant   due   to   its

9

disqualification   any   person   from   amongst   its   members   was

required to be elected as Chairman and/or to hold the office of

the Chairman for the remaining period.  Therefore, in exercise of

powers   under   Regulation   119(2)   of   the   Regulations,   1982,

Respondent   No.3   ­  Anil   Kumar   Dubey   was   elected   as   the

Chairman for the remaining period who presided over the meeting

dated 27.12.2021.

4.4 However,   it   was   the   case   on   behalf   of   Respondent   no.1

which came to be accepted by the learned Single Judge and the

Division Bench of the High Court that being a Vice Chairman, a

meeting   was   required   to   be   chaired/presided   over   by   him   in

absence   of   the   Chairman.     Heavy   reliance   was   placed   on

Regulation 92(2).  On fair reading of Regulation 92(2) read with

Regulation 117(2), we are of the opinion that Regulation 92(2)

shall not be applicable at all.  Regulation 92(2) shall be applicable

only in a case of absence and not in a case where the post of

Chairman and/or office bearer has fallen vacant.   There is a

distinction   between   the   absence   and   the   post   fallen   vacant.

Regulation   92(2)   shall   be   applicable   in   a   case   where   the

10

Chairman and/or the office bearer though is not disqualified but

is absent for some reason.  Regulation 117(2) shall be applicable

in a case where the elected member of the Regional Council has

been disqualified on he being found guilty of any professional or

other misconduct and awarded penalty of fine.  Therefore, in case

of a vacation of office as per Regulation 117(2), such post fallen

vacant is required to be filled in by election by electing another

person   from   amongst   its   members   to   hold   the   office   for   the

remaining period of a year (Regulation 119(2)).  In that view of the

matter both, the learned Single Judge as well as the Division

Bench of the High Court have seriously erred in misinterpreting

Regulation 92(2) and Regulation 117 read with Regulation 119(2).

Both, the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench of

the High Court have not appreciated the distinction between the

vacation of office under Regulation 117(2) of the Regulation and

the absence of an office bearer under Regulation 92.  Under the

circumstances   both,   the   learned   Single   Judge   as   well   as   the

Division   Bench   of   the   High   Court   have   seriously   erred   in

quashing and setting aside the election of the office bearers of the

11

EIRC of ICSI held in the meeting held on 27.12.2021 on the

ground   that   the   meeting   was   not   presided   over   by   the   Vice

Chairman (Respondent no.1 herein).

5. Now   so   far   as   the   submission   made   by   Shri  Ritin   Rai,

learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the contesting

respondent no.1 that even otherwise the election was not held

legally   and   there   was   irregularity   in   conducting   the

election/meeting is concerned, at the outset it is required to be

noted that there were disputed questions of fact on whether the

meeting and/or election was irregularly conducted or not.  As per

Regulation   114(4)   whether   any   dispute   arises   regarding   any

election to a Regional Council, the matter may be referred by the

candidate   concerned   within   30   days   from   the   date   of   the

declaration of the result of the election, to the President and the

decision   shall   be   final.    Under   the  circumstances,   in  view   of

Regulation 114(4) of the Regulations, the High Court ought not to

have entertained the writ petition challenging the validity of the

election.  Even otherwise, it is required to be noted that even as

per   Regulation   114(4),   the   election   can   be   challenged   by   the

12

candidate concerned.  In the present case respondent no.1 who

challenged the election of the office bearers did not even contest

the election.   Under the circumstances the High Court erred in

entertaining   the   writ   petition   challenging   the   election   at   the

instance of the respondent no.1 who even did not contest the

election of the office bearers.  

6. In view of the above and for the reason stated above present

appeals succeed.  The impugned judgment and order passed by

the Division Bench of the High Court as well as the learned Single

Judge quashing and setting aside the election of the office bearers

of the EIRC of the ICSI held on 27.12.2021 are hereby quashed

and   set   aside.     The   original   writ   petitions   stand   dismissed.

Present appeals are accordingly allowed.  No costs.

………………………………….J.

 [M.R. SHAH]

NEW DELHI; ………………………………….J.

NOVEMBER 7, 2022  [M.M. SUNDRESH]

13

14