RAVI GOENKA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud, learned counsel for the petitioner ; Mr. Y. S. Bhate, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 ; and Mr. Rajendra Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

(2.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Initially, the Writ Petition was filed for a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to take a decision on the complaint of the petitioner dated 09.11.2020 as to whether respondent No.4 can opt for e-voting and remote e-voting or not. Alternatively, prayer was made amongst others as to whether in view of the Companies (Administration and Management) Rules, 2014, as amended, e-voting can be used as a facility by respondent No.4. Related queries have been made by the petitioner seeking a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 for clarification. Another prayer made was for a direction to respondent No.4 not to hold the 96th annual general meeting (AGM) scheduled on 21.12.2020. After the Writ Petition was amended following the order dated 03.12.2020, three additional prayers have been made. As per the first additional prayer, petitioner seeks a declaration that Rule 20(4)(vi) of the Companies (Management and Administration) Rules, 2014 is unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and on such ground should be struck down as null and void. Second additional prayer made is to disallow remote e-voting or e-voting in the AGM of respondent No.4 or allow the same on the day of the AGM. The third additional prayer made is for appointment of an independent observer to oversee the elections of respondent No.4 scheduled on 21.12.2020.

(3.) Petitioner claims to be a special life member of respondent No.4 which is basically a club though incorporated under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956.