ABAYAMBIGAI NIDHI LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitions have been instituted to assail the order passed by the second respondent dtd. 23/6/2023 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner in Form NDH-4 and to declare the amendment made substituting Sec. 406 of The Companies Act 2013 with new Sec. 406 as per The Companies (Amendment) Act 2017 (Act 1 of 2018) published vide gazette dtd. 3/1/2018 and notified with effect from 15/8/2019 requiring the Nidhi Companies which are already incorporated as Nidhi Companies to once again get a declaration as Nidhi by the Central Government is illegal, excessive, arbitrary and unconstitutional and strike down the same; to declare the amendment made to Nidhi Rules 2014 by Nidhi (Amendment) Rules 2019 vide notification dtd. 1/7/2019 with effect from 15/8/2019 by inserting Rule 3A and Rule 23A are illegal, excessive, arbitrary and unconstitutional and strike down the same; to declare the amendment made to Nidhi Rules 2014 by Nidhi (Amendment) Rules 2022 vide notification dtd. 19/4/2022 with effect from 19/4/2022 by inserting provisos to Rule 3A and Rule 23A are illegal, excessive, arbitrary and unconstitutional and strike down the same.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner restricted his prayer by submitting that the second respondent passed orders on the application beyond the time limit of 45 days fixed to dispose of the application. In the present case, the application in Form NDH-4 was filed by the petitioner on 15/4/2020, but the same was rejected by the second respondent in proceeding dtd. 23/6/2023.

(3.) A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that certain observations against the petitioner are made with reference to the particulars available in the application and consequently the rejection order was passed. The learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the petitioner will be satisfied if the subsequent reply/explanation given by the petitioner is taken into consideration and a fresh order is passed, by affording opportunity to the petitioner, on merits and in accordance with law.