IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.33349 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/S GAYATHRI AND NAMITH ARCHITECTS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT,1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.14,TEMPLE TREES ROAD, CAUVERY COLONY, NEAR 1ST BLOCK,KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 047 AND REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,MRS. GAYATHRI SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/O PRASANNA KUMAR SHETTY … PETITIONER (BY SRI.KASHYAP N NAIK, ADV.) AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS, SHASTRI BHAVAN, DR RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 010 2. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES E WING,2ND FLOOR, KENDRIYA SADANA, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAJARAM SOORYAMBAIL, ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 18.5.2009 AT ANEX-M, 9.11.2009 AT ANNEX-N, 23.12.2014 AT ANEX-P AND 1.3.2017 AT ANNEX-A AND CONSIDER THE E-FORM 5 FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 28.3.2008 AT ANNEX-H OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO FILE FRESH E-FORM 5 AS PER THE REVISED RULES WITHOUT IMPOSING ANY PENALTY FOR DELAY IN FILING THE SAID FORM AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondents to consider the representations dated 18.05.2009 Annexure-M, 09.11.2009( Annexure-N), 23.12.2014 (Annexure- P) and 01.03.2017 (Annexure-A) and consider the e-Form 5 filed by the petitioner on 28.03.2008 (Annexure-H) or in the alternative permit the petitioner to file fresh e-Form 5 as per the revised rules without imposing any penalty for delay in filing the said form.
2. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted the petition be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation to the competent authority with regard to his grievance and the competent authority be directed to decide the same in accordance with law.
3. In view of the submission made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that in case a fresh representation is made by the petitioner to the competent authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today, the same shall be dealt with by the competent authority in accordance with law, by a speaking order, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such representation.
4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-