Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2020
  6. /
  7. January

Krishna Yogeshkumar Patel vs Union Of India

High Court Of Gujarat|25 September, 2023
[1] Heard Mr.Khemka, learned advocate for the petitioner through Video Conferencing. He relies on the order dated 21.1.2020 in Special Civil Application No.1192 of 2020 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court which reads as under:
"Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that Director Identification Number of the petitioner, i.e. DIN 00693117 is suspended by the respondent. It is submitted that the petitioner continue to be the Director in other on-going companies which is not delisted by the ROC. However, on account of delisting of one of the companies, where the petitioner is the Director, the petitioner is unable to perform his statutory duty as Director of other companies.
1. In view of the aforesaid submissions, RULE returnable on 11.2.2020. Learned Advocate Mr. Kshitij Amin waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent No.1.
2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner states that upon the DIN being reactivated, the petitioner undertake not to utilize the same in any manner with regard to the Company, which is struck off from the ROC.
3. Pending the petition, the respondents are directed to reactivate and de-freeze the DIN of the petitioner forthwith, subject to final outcome of the petition.
4. This matter be listed alongwith Special Civil Application No.101/2019 and allied matters.
5. Direct Service is permitted for the respondent No.2."
[2] In view of above, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:
2.1 Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that Director Identification Number of the petitioner, i.e. DIN Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 25 00:29:31 IST 2020 C/SCA/8543/2020 ORDER 03504956 is suspended by the respondent. It is submitted that the petitioner continues to be the Director in other on- going companies which is not delisted by the ROC. However, on account of delisting of one of the companies, where the petitioner is the Director, the petitioner is unable to perform his statutory duty as Director of other companies.
2.2 In view of the aforesaid submissions, RULE. 2.3 Learned Advocate for the petitioner states that upon the DIN being reactivated, the petitioner undertakes not to utilize the same in any manner with regard to the Company, which is struck off from the ROC.
2.4 Pending the petition, the respondents are directed to reactivate and de-freeze the DIN of the petitioner forthwith, subject to final outcome of the petition.
2.5 This matter be listed alongwith Special Civil Application No.101 of 2019 and allied matters. 2.6. Direct Service is permitted for the respondent No.2.
In addition thereto, the Registry to communicate this order through E-mail and / or Fax.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) VATSAL / A. B. VAGHELA Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 25 00:29:31 IST 2020
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Judges
  • Biren Vaishnav