Advocate'S Check List (To Be Certified by Advocate-On-Record)

ADVOCATE’S CHECK LIST
(TO BE CERTIFIED BY ADVOCATE-ON-RECORD)

Indicate
Yes/NA
1 SLP(C) has been filed in Form No. 28 with certificate. NA
2 The Petition is as per the provisions of Order XV Rule 1. Yes
3 The papers of SLP have been arranged as per Order XXI, NA
Rule (3)(1)(f).
4 Brief list of dates/events has been filed. Yes
5 Paragraphs and pages of paper books have been numbered Yes
consecutively and correctly noted in Index.
6 Proper and required number of paper books (1 + 1) have Yes
been filed.
7 The contents of the petition, applications and accompanying Yes
documents are clear, legible and typed in double space on
one side of the paper.
8 The particulars of the impugned judgment passed by the NA
court(s) below are uniformly written in all the documents.
9 In case of appeal by certificate the appeal is accompanied by NA
judgment and decree appealed from and order granting
certificate.
10 If the petition is time barred, application for condonation of NA
delay mentioning the no. of days of delay, with affidavit and
court fee has been filed.
11 The Annexures referred to in the petition are true copies of Yes
the documents before the court(s) below and are filed in
chronological order as per List of Dates.
12 The annexures referred to in the petition are filed and Yes
indexed separately and not marked collectively.
13 The relevant provisions of the Constitution, statutes, NA
ordinances, rules, regulations, bye laws, orders etc. referred
to in the impugned judgment / order has been filed as
Appendix to the SLP.
14 In SLP against the order passed in Second Appeal, copies of NA
the orders passed by the Trial Court and First Appellate
Court have been filed.
15 The complete listing proforma has been filled in, signed and Yes
included in the paper books.
16 In a petition (PIL) filed under clause (d) of Rule 12(1) Order
XXXVIII, the petitioner has disclosed:
(a) his full name, complete postal address, e-mail
address, phone number, proof regarding personal Yes
identification, occupation and annual income, PAN number
and National Unique Identity Card number, if any;
(b) the facts constituting the cause of action;
(c) the nature of injury caused or likely to be caused to
the public; Yes
(d) the nature and extent of personal interest, if any, of Yes
the petitioner(s);
(e) details regarding any civil, criminal or revenue Yes
litigation, involving the petitioner or any of the petitioners,
which has or could have a legal nexus with the issue(s)
involved in the Public Interest Litigation. Yes
17 If any identical matter is pending/disposed of by the Hon. NA
Supreme Court, the complete particulars of such matters
have been given.
18 The statement in terms of the Order XIX Rule 3(1) of NA
Supreme Court Rules 2013 has been given in the Petition of
appeal.
19 Whether a Bank Draft of Rs.50,000/- or 50% of the amount,
whichever is less, has been deposited by the person
intending to appeal, if required to be paid as per the order of NA
the NCDRC, in terms of Section 23 of the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986.
20 In case of appeals under Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007,
the petitioner / appellant has moved before the Armed Forces
Tribunal for granting certificate for leave to appeal to the NA
Supreme Court.
21 All the paper-books to be filed after curing the defects shall Yes
be in order.
I hereby declare that I have personally verified the petition and its contents
and it is in conformity with the Supreme Court Rules 2013. I certify that the
above requirements of this Check List have been complied with. I further
certify that all the documents necessary for the purpose of hearing of the
matter have been filed.
[Pranab Prakash]
Advocate on-record for the Petitioner,
20A, Lawyer’s Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, New Delhi.
Code No: 2660
9711229563
New Delhi;
Date: 17.07.2020
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
EXTRA ORDINARY-ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.______ OF 2020 (PIL)
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION
IN THE MATTER OF:
SUMAN KUMAR …PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …RESPONDENTS
INDEX OF FILING
SRL. DESCRIPTION COPIES CT.
FEE
1 Synopsis & List of Dates 1+3
2 Listing Proforma 1+3
3 Writ Petition With Affidavit. 1+3 540/-
4 Annexures P1 to P-17 1+3
5 Application for exemption from 100/-
Filing duly Notarized Affidavit.
6. Application for Stay 100/-
6 Memo of Appearance on behalf of 1 10
the petitioner
Total Rs. 750/-
FILED BY:
Pranab Prakash
Advocate for the Petitioner
20A, Lawyer’s Chamber,
Supreme Court of India,
New Delhi.
9711229563
Date: 17.07.2020
New Delhi.
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
WITH
I.A. No. ___________ of 2O20
An application for Exemption from filing Notarized
Affidavit in Support of the Petition
WITH
I.A. No. ___________ of 2O20
An application for Stay
PAPER BOOK
[FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE]
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER: PRANAB PRAKASH

INDEX OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
S.NO. DATE OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PAGE
NO.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
INDEX
S.No Particulars of Documents Page No. of part to Remarks
which it belongs
Part I Part-II
[Contents [Contents
of Paper of file
Book] alone.
[i] [ii] [iii] [iv] [v]
1 E-Court Fees NIL
2 O/R on limitation NIL NIL
3 Listing Performa. `A1-A2’ `A1-A2’
4 Cover page of Paper Book A-3
5 Index of Record of A-4
Proceedings
6 Limitation Report prepared NIL
by the Registry
7 Defect List A
8 Note Sheet NS 1 to
9 Synopsis with List of Dates B-T
10 Writ Petition with Affidavit. 1-47
11 ANNEXURE P-1
A true copy of the reply of
The Institute Of Company 48-54
Secretaries Of India dated
08.07.2019.
12 ANNEXURE P-2
A true copy of the reply of
The Institute Of Company 55-58
Secretaries Of India dated
25.07.2019.
13 ANNEXURE P-3
A true copy of the 59-60
notification dated
03.01.2020.
14 ANNEXURE P-4
A True copy of the letter 61-64
dated 08.01.2020 issued by
The Institute Of Company
Secretaries Of India.
15 ANNEXURE P-5
A true copy of the letter
dated 09.01.2020 issued by 65-66
The Institute Of Company
Secretaries Of India.
16 ANNEXURE P-6
A true copy of the letter dated 67-70
10.01.2020.
17 ANNEXURE P-7
A true Copy of the letter
dated 11.01.2020 submitted 71-73
to ICSI by the petitioner.
18 ANNEXURE P-8
A true Copy of the letter 74-76
dated 03.02.2020.
19 ANNEXURE P-9
A true copy of the Form 77-82
DIR 12.
20 ANNEXURE P-10
A true copy of the relevant
extracts of annual report 83-84
2018-2019 of Ministry of
Corporate Affairs.
21 ANNEXURE P-11
extracts of annual report 85-86
2018-2019 of Ministry of
Corporate Affairs.
22 ANNEXURE P-12
A true Copy of the list of 87-90
vanishing companies as on
31.03.2019.
23 ANNEXURE P-13
A true copy of the news 91-94
clippings dated 12.06.2019
published in Live Mint.
24 ANNEXURE P-14
A true copy of the news 95-96
published in The Economics
Times dated 30.08.2019.
25 ANNEXURE P-15
extracts of Annual Reports 97-98
of 2018-2019 of Ministry of
Corporate Affairs.
26 ANNEXURE P-16
extracts of Annual Reports 99-101
of 2018-2019 of Ministry of
Corporate Affairs.
27 ANNEXURE P-17
A true copy of the 102-175
representation dated
13.07.2020.
28 I.A. NO. ______ OF 2020
Application for Exemption
from filing Notarized 176-177
Affidavit in support of the
Writ Petition.
29 I.A. NO.______ OF 2020
Application for Stay. 178-180
30 F/M 181
31 V/A 182
A-1
LISTING PROFORMA
Section: X
The case pertains to (Please
tick/check the correct box): Civil
Central Act: (Title) The Constitution Of India
Section: Article 32
Central Rule: (Title) N/A
Rule No.(s): N/A
State Act: (Title) N/A
Section : N/A
State Rule: (Title) N/A
Rule No.(s): N/A
Impugned Interim Order : (Date) N/A
Impugned Final Order/Decree; N/A
(Date)
High Court: (Name) N/A
Names of Judges: N/A
Tribunal/Authority: (Name) N/A
1. Nature of Matter: Civil
2. (a) Petitioner/appellant No.1: Suman Kumar
(b) e-mail ID: N/A
(c) Mobile Phone number: N/A
3. (a) Respondent No.1: Union of India
(b) E-mail ID: N/A
(c) Mobile phone number: N/A
4. (a) Main category classification: 08(PIL Matter)
(b) sub classification: 812(Others)
5. Not to be listed before: N/A
6. (a) Similar Disposed Of matter No Similar Disposed Of
with Citation, if any, and matter
case details:
(b) Similar Pending matter with No Similar Pending matter

case details:
7. Criminal Matters: NO
(a) Whether accused/convict N/A
has surrendered:
(b) FIR No. N/A
Date:
(c) Police Station: N/A
(d) Sentence Awarded: N/A
(e) Period of Sentence N/A
Undergone including period of
detention/custody undergone::
8. Land Acquisition Matters: NO
(a) Date of Section 4 N/A
notification:
(b) Date of Section 6 N/A
notification:
(c) Date of Section 17 N/A
notification:
9. Tax Matters: State the tax effect: N/A
10. Special Category (first N/A
petitioner/appellant only):
Senior Citizen > 65 years N/A
SC/ST N/A
Woman/Child N/A
Disabled N/A
Legal Aid Case N/A
In custody N/A
11. Vehicle Number (in case of N/A
Motor Accident Claim Matters):
(PRANAB PRAKASH)
Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner
e-mail:[email protected]
Ph: +91 - 9711229563
Date:17.07.2020
New Delhi
B
SYNOPSIS
That this public interest litigation is being preferred on

behalf of the petitioner under article 32 of the Constitution of
India seeking declaration of the notification of Respondent No.
01 dated 03.01.2020 and subsequent enforcement w.e.f.
01.04.2020 of the notification as being ultra-vires and repugnant
to the article 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. In this
respect it is pertinently submitted that the said notification dated
03.01.2020 is constitutionally impermissible in as much as there
is no rational basis for the categorization and classification for
the purpose of requirement of regulatory professionals i.e.
Company Secretaries, as the necessity of compliance of
Companies Act is sacrosanct and absolute and any compromise
by way of classification on a ground of paid-up capital cannot be
treated as a reasonable classification and exempting the
companies from the regulatory compliances on the basis of
irrational and unreasonable classification under the garb of paid
up capital is discriminatory in as much as it infringes Article 14
of the Constitution of India. It is settled law that the test to be
laid down for the validity of any law is that the classification on
which it is founded must be based upon intelligible differentia
which distinguishes persons or things grouped together from
others left out of the group and the second test that differential in
question must be reasonable with relation to the object sought to
be achieved by rule or statutory provision in question. The
impugned notification is not standing to the scrutiny to the both
tests as the intention of classification on the basis of paid-up
capital is to exempt the group of the companies from the
mandatory compliances of laws cannot be said to be reasonable
C
classification in the light of the fact that the compliance of the
law shall have to be uniform irrespective of the size or turnover
or any other criteria of the companies. This Hon’ble Court had
reiterated time and again that any law enacted must fulfil the
basic test as to whether there is rational nexus of the
classification with the objective sought to be achieved by
regulation 8A of Companies Act. The un-reasonability of this
exemption shall further aggravate the corporate lawlessness and
shall encourage possible fraudster to commit offenses of
syphoning of public money by way of taking advantage of legal
lacuna in form of irrational exemption on the basis of paid-up
capital. As such the above said classification runs counter to the
settle principles of the doctrine of intelligible differentia. Hence,
the said notification is arbitrary and discriminatory in as much as
the spirit and intendment of notification is premised upon the
principle which discriminates the categories of companies and as
such it is inconsistent to the basic intention of the Companies
Act 2013, which mandates the requirement of Company
Secretary for compliance of law. In this respect it is submitted
that the Respondent No.3 had not taken fundamental canons of
jurisprudence in making distinction and classification relating to
the requirement of appointment of the Company Secretary in a
particular company for the purpose of due compliance of affairs
of companies in terms of provision of the Companies Act 2013.
The respondent No. 3 had also overlooked the fundamental fact
that the absence of company secretary in the companies are
compounding the regulatory mechanism and exposing the
company to all kind of financial manipulations and irregularities,
which are resulting the large number of the companies to the
cusp of their closure without any detection of financial
D
malpractices. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the poor
enforcement of the corporate governance in the companies
across the country, which are resulting in serious plummeting of
the level of transparency and fairness in the functioning of the
companies of our country which are also hitting the very
foundation of the financial sinews of our country’s economy.
Hence, the petitioner is seeking a comprehensive guidelines for
evolving of the robust mechanism for regulating the proper
operations and effective enforcement of corporate governance in
all companies irrespective of their paid up capital in order to
minimize the incidences of financial and administrative
irregularities. Thus, the pathetic affairs of the administration and
enforcement of the companies law are debilitating the entire
financial atmosphere and environment of the working of the
companies across the country. The corporate lawlessness is
impacting on the overall financial fabric of the country. As such,
the introduction of said notification dated 03.01.2020 by way of
amendment in erstwhile provision under the law is further
eroding and undermining the regulatory compliances on account
of absence of effective mechanism to rein the illegally rouge
companies across the country.
That the petitioner is a public spirited citizen of India and

has been involved in various societal and community activities
like promoting education among the excluded and marginalized
sections of the society by providing the financial and
infrastructural support to the remotest part of the country. The
petitioner had also founded Unmukt Udaan Education Council
which is dedicated towards upliftment of the quality of education
and educational infrastructure in the rural and remote areas of the
country. The petitioner being a qualified company secretary
E
fellow member of Respondent No.3 is equally concerned with
the downfall of the quality of regulatory mechanism in the
companies, leading to malfeasance and misfeasance of the most
of the companies by motivated and selfish individuals who are
under the garb of the fictitious companies, are in fact striking at
the financial backbone of the country. With the tightening of the
regulatory mechanism through introduction of Companies Act
2013 has brought about the worsening rot to the light as more
than six lakhs of companies had been declared defunct on
account of various non-compliances and all such companies are
lying struck off. There is no account of rupees thousands of
crores being syphoned off through formation of fictitious and
fake companies in our country. Hence, the petitioner is bringing
the issue of regulation and enforcement of the corporate
governance in all companies across the country by making
Company Secretary as integral and inseparable constituent of
every companies irrespective of the paid-up capital for the
purpose of compliance and regulation. The petitioner is
completely taken off guard at the callous discrimination and
distinction in the matter of compliances and regulations
rendering the whole issue optional and voluntary at the swift
disposal of the officials of the particular companies to utter
disregard to the professional competence of the company
secretary who are legally qualified by virtue of special enactment
of statutory provision of companies law. It is submitted that the
petitioner has already approached the respondents by making the
representation requesting immediate roll-back of the said
notification dated 03.01.2020 as the classification carving out
exemption is affront and antithetical to the constitutional scheme
of right to equality and equal protection under the Constitution of
F
India. However, the contention raised in the said representation
remained un-responded as yet.
The petitioner is related to many philanthropic acts and

one of the primary concern of the petitioner is to ensure the
enforcement of corporate governance in the industries with the
help of qualified Company Secretaries across the country in order
to streamlining the optimum utilization of the corporate
competence in the development of the country and economic
activities thereof. The petitioner has been visiting faculty of
various institutions for last several years in various parts of the
country. The petitioner is equally connected in reformation of the
antiquated regulatory mechanism through the political process by
making representation to the authorities for remedial action
against existing anomalies crept in the system. In the past, the
petitioner has also been involved in the election processes of
Central Council Election of ICSI with pro-bono commitment.
The petitioner has unblemished record of relentlessly
contributing towards ensuring the rights of the Company
Secretaries across the country.
That the Petitioner is a fellow member of Company

Secretary of India, and has been working in private sector in a
capacity of Executive Vice President (Corporate Affairs) and
Company Secretary and his social works are purely self-driven
for the cause of the public at large.
That it is submitted that the petitioner is having deep

concern at the future prospect of the Companies Secretaries as
the amendment of rule 8A is severely curtailing the rights of
employment of Company Secretary in companies across the
country. The petitioner is having further apprehension that
G
arbitrary classification by way of enhancement of paid-up capital
from Rs 5 crore to Rs 10 crore as a criterion for requirement of
Company Secretary for the purpose of compliance is completely
arbitrary and discriminatory as this notification dated 03.01.2020
striking at the cardinal purpose of regulation of the companies
through the Companies Secretaries. This illegal enhancement of
paid-up capital is arbitrary and classification thereof is
discriminatory in as much as this amendment implies illegal
leverage and unjustified discretion conferred to the companies in
matter of regulation and compliances. Such act of
discrimination, further weakens the regulatory necessity of a
company by exempting from requirement of the Company
Secretaries or other compliances for the purpose of the
regulation and administration of the companies across the
country. It is beyond prudence of common man that the legal
compliance is being based upon the selective exemption on the
basis of paid-up capital of the companies as the legislative
intendments of the law is to ensure the uniform compliances and
regulation in all companies with solitary aim to strengthen the
financial discipline in the corporate entities. The petitioner is
basically avowed proponent of transparency and fairness in
functioning of the companies as the companies are the backbone
of the financial prosperity of country. Hence, the petitioner is
bringing these issues to the notice of this Hon’ble Court for
appropriate directions to plug the statutory and legal loopholes in
strengthening the corporate governance across the country and
the insertion of the conditions by way of classification on the
basis of paid-up capital is clearly infringing article 14, 19 (1)(g)
of the Constitution of India as the condition imposed is arbitrary
and discriminatory and exemption thereof does not serve the
H
basic purpose of the Companies Law. It is further submitted that
such discrimination is defeating the whole purpose of
compliance of the companies laws as there must not be
classification in terms of compliances of law as whole statutory
processes of the Companies Act are being uniformly applied in
their creation and their operations throughout their existence.
Hence, any exemption from the compliances of companies laws
is based upon irrational logic and reasoning.
Hence, this writ petition.
LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
Letter/ Particulars/ Remarks

Dates/ Year
29.08.2013 Companies Act, 2013 was introduced

replacing Companies Act, 1956 with the
objective of self-governance, transparency and
stringent provisions against the
defaulter’snon-complying the Act. Further
containing the provisions of appointment of
whole time company secretary in prescribed
company U/Sec 203 of the Companies Act,
2013.
31.03.2014 That the MCA has notified Companies

(Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 stating that
every listed company and every other public
company having a paid share capital of Rs 10
Crore or more shall have a whole time key
I
Dates/ Year
managerial personnel including whole time

company secretary.
09.06.2014 Immediately it was realized that all the private

companies has got out of the appointment of
the whole time company secretary which was
there since 1975. Once it was realized and
pointed out by the stake holders immediately
the notification dated 09.06.2014 has come
inserting Rule 8A in the above Companies
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014, stating
that “A company other than a company
covered under Rule 8 which has a paid up
capital of Rs 5 Crore or more shall have a
whole time company secretary.
FY 2017-18 Ministry has decided to removal of name of

companies from the Registrar of Companies
(ROC) and 2,34, 357 companies were closed
during the FY 2017-18, totaling to the paid up
capital of Rs 14,593.95 Crores. As these
companies were falling in the categories of
continued non-compliances even non-filing of
annual accounts and annual returns.
FY 2018-19 Similarly in the FY 2018-19, 1,38,432

companies were struck off with the total paid
up capital of Rs 12,753.19 Crores due to
J
Dates/ Year
continued non-compliance and the Ministry

actions thereof.
30.11.2018 There were 33 Lakhs DINs (Director

Identification Number) in the registry and
around 15.88 Lakhs DIN holders have filed
DIR KYC as on 30.11.2018 (48.121%
Directors remained non-complied inviting
questions on their sanctity, existence, and
traceability) in the drive by MCA managed to
feed only 11 Lakhs Aadhar Card holders. The
non-compliances, non-traceability, fake,
fabricated, benamies, dummy companies and
directors has become grave concerns being
utilized for malicious illegal economic
activities and white collar crimes.
31.03.2019 As per the annual report of MCA (Ministry of

Corporate Affairs) out of total 18,73,044
companies, 6,70,018 companies were closed
[35.77% (more than one third) of the total
companies] were closed due to non-
compliances/ serious governance issues and
only 11,56,374 companies were ACTIVE
companies as on 31.03.2019. The Ministry has
decided to weed out inactive companies and
disqualified directors, protect the public
money, overcome the financial irregularities
K
Dates/ Year
and increase the effectiveness of the

governance mechanism.
25.04.2019 The ministry has issued notification dated

21.02.2019 for filing of FORM ACTIVE
(Active Company Tagging Identities and
Verification) on or before 25.04.2019. This
Form was prepared by the ministry with
exhaustive research getting the whereabouts of
the companies registered office, KMPs, all
statutory officials, auditors, cost auditors,
M.D., company secretaries e.t.c. and it was
carrying the stringent conditions for
compliances and it was too difficult to
continue the non-compliances. Beside several
critical information controlling the company it
was asking the complete PAN and
membership number of the wholetime
company secretary of the company. These
stringent provisions have created great barrier
in continued non-compliances/non-
governance.
15.06.2019 The said notification for filing of INC 22A

FORM ACTIVE was further extended to
15.06.2019 without any additional fee and
thereafter with additional fee of Rs 10,000/-
vide notification dated 25.04.2019.
L
Dates/ Year
17.06.2019 Ministry has issued letter dated 17.06.2019 to

ICSI (Institute of Company Secretaries of
India- A statutory body under the Company
Secretaries Act, 1980 Monitoring the
profession of company secretaries and
Corporate Governance), forwarding the
different letters dated 04.04.2019, 09.04.2019,
undated letters and emails of 16 individual,
firms and companies raising their different
concerns before the ministry including
grievances of few one about not able to attract
company secretary due to high salary,
affording salary of company secretary,
exemption for private companies with less
turn over, non-availability if company
secretaries. Out of the above said16
grievances, 6 grievances were pertaining to
non-availability of the company secretary in
the market. The roving grievances were raised
without any base to evade the compliance of
the appointment of company secretaries.
08.07.2019 The ICSI has addressed individually all the

grievances of the stake holders and have stated
that keeping in mind the present parameters
for appointment of company secretary which
are framed by MCA after a lot of public
debate and deliberations are absolutely aligned
M
Dates/ Year
with the present requirements; and therefore,

need to be kept intact. Needless to mention
that the level of compliance as envisaged by
the Government is rising day by day. It was
specifically stated “That, out of total active
companies, i.e. approximately, 11 Lakh
companies, only 39,805 companies are
required to appoint a wholetime company
secretary. We wish to submit that as on 01st
July, 2019, ICSI has 58,690 company
secretaries on its register out of which only
10,644 are in practice. Accordingly, sufficient
numbers of company secretaries are available
to serve the corporate India. Further, ICSI
through its dedicated placement cell provides
placement services to corporate to meet the
demand and supply of the company secretaries
across the country.
09.07.2019 The ministry has further forwarded letter dated

08.07.2019 which was received by the ICSI on
09.07.2019 containing 18 more grievances
sent by different stake holders for the
comments of the ICSI. Out of the 18
grievances 12 were not related to appointment
of company secretaries and it was pertaining
to other concerns. Further, out of 18, 4 have
raised the grievances that they are not able to
N
Dates/ Year
find a company secretary or there is a deficit

of members in the market. These allegations
were completely bogus and it has been raised
ulterior motives to continue the non-
compliances of the express provisions of law.
25.07.2019 The ICSI has addressed and made its

comments individually on all the grievances of
the stake holders and reiterated that “We, once
again, reiterate that the present parameters for
appointment of company secretary which are
framed by the MCA after a lot of public
the Government is rising day by day.
We Shall be pleased to provide any further

information or clarification in this regard on
hearing from your good self.”
03.01.2020 The MCA has issued the notification dated

03.01.2020 stating that “Every private
company which has a paid-up share capital of
Rs 10 Crores or more shall have a whole time
company secretary. The consequence thereof,
all the public and private company having the
paid-up capital of less than Rs 10 Crores were
O
Dates/ Year
totally exempted from the appointment of

wholetime company secretary. As per the
report dated 01.01.2015 containing the data as
on 31.12.2014, there were 11,532 companies
having the paid up capital of Rs 83,376.46
Crores under the bracket of paid up capital of
above Rs 5 Crores to Rs 10 Crores. Hence, a
big question mark has come on the
employment of approximately more than
11,000 company secretaries, great
compromise with the Corporate Governance
of these companies and have made the impact
on 3.5 Lakhs students on the role of the ICSI,
who is seeing their future in the field of
Corporate Governance and company
secretaries and hence the protest has started
across the country.
08.01.2020 As the capital limit has increased in spite of

the comments and efforts of the ICSI and the
members has started questioning the role and
responsibilities of the institute and its council
members, it has issued a letter to the members
stating that “It was because of your institutes
continuous involvements and representations,
the enhancements in limits has been limited to
Rs 10 Crores only and not beyond.” Further, it
was also stated that ICSI is committed provide
P
Dates/ Year
whole hearted support to its members and

students and will take all necessary measures
as may be required. It has also appealed to the
members and students “We earnestly appeal
all our members and students not to post any
derogatory or defamatory remarks against the
regulators, stakeholders or Institute on the
social media or by any other means, keeping
in view its far reaching impact on the
credibility of the profession.” That the institute
has threatened the members and the students
from making the protests and questioning the
failure of the ICSI and its councils and have
restricted the freedom of speech and
expression. The ICSI and the council has also
threatened the members for the disciplinary
proceedings.
09.01.2020 The ICSI has again issued the advisory to all

the regional council members, chapters and
others stating that “It is advised to refrain from
making any derogatory or defamatory
comment against the MCA or the ICSI.
Further you are advised from refrain the
facilitating the demonstration by the members
and the students. Also the regional councils/
Chapters/ Units are advised not to make any
representation in this regard at their end
Q
Dates/ Year
directly to any authority /forum, as the

institute has already in process of once again
taking up the matter with the MCA. So by
these advisory again the members were
restricted from raising the voice on the said
change and protest thereof.
10.01.2020 The ICSI has written the letter to the MCA

stating that the said “Amendment has caused a
apprehension in the mind of our members and
students and there has been lots of resentment
in the fraternity across the country.” The ICSI
has requested for further amendment in to the
rule taking into account the following
suggestions:
SUGGESTION -1:
Every company which has a paid up share

capital of more than Rs 5 Crores and up to Rs
10 Crores and
a. Turnover of hundred Crores rupees or more;

or
b. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks

or public financial institutions of one hundred
crores rupees or more;
Shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary.
Explanation- For the purpose of this sub rule,

R
Dates/ Year
the paid up share capital, turnover, or

outstanding loans or borrowings as the case
may be, existing on the last date of latest
audited financial statement may be taken into
account.
Or ALTERNATE SUGGESTION -2:
Every Company which has:
a. A paid up share capital of ten crores rupees or

more;
b. Turnover of one hundred crores rupees or

more; or
c. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks

crores rupees or more.;
Explanation:- For the purpose of this sub rule,

account.
11.01.2020 That the petitioner not being satisfied by the

reasoning and the submissions of the institute
and its officials have requested for open house
sessions or presentation before the Council for
S
Dates/ Year
the strong submission before the Ministry.

Copy of the said letter dated 11th January,
2020 is enclosed herewith and marked as
Annexure- 7. However, the said letter remain
un responded from the ICSI.
03.02.2020 However, the ICSI have re approached for the

further amendment in the rule vide letter dated
03rd February, 2020 (Copy of the same is
enclosed and marked herewith as Annexure –
8) with the prayer that to kindly consider
further amendment in Rule 8A of the
Companies (Appointment and Remuneration
of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2013, taking
into consideration inserting the following in
place of the existing provision:
“Every company which has:
a. A paid up share capital of ten

crores rupees or more; or
b. Net worth of one hundred crores

rupees or more; or
c. Outstanding loans or borrowings

from banks or public financial
institutions of one hundred crores
rupees or more; or
d. Turnover of two hundred fifty

T
Dates/ Year
crore rupees or more
Explanation:- For the purpose of this rule, the

paid up share capital, net worth, outstanding
loans or borrowings or turnover as the case
may be existing on the last date of latest
account.
Every company which ceases to be a company

covered under Rule 8A for three consecutive
financial years shall not be required to appoint
company secretary till such time it meets the
criteria specified in Rule 8A.
13.07.2020 The Petitioner gave representation to the

Respondents.
17.07.2020 Hence this petition.

1
THE SUPREME COURT OF INIDA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
(CIVIL EXTRAORDINARY JURISDICTION)
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. ____ OF 2020.
IN THE MATTER OF:
SUMAN KUMAR
S/o Late Sh. Arjun Prasad Singh
R/o22/11, Second Floor,
Back Side Near Patel Park,
West Patel Nagar, New Delhi-110008.
E-Mail ID :[email protected]
Mobile : 9958299558 …Petitioner
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Through its Secretary
Ministry of Corporate Affairs
A -Wing, Shashtri Bhawan,
New Delhi. 110001 … Respondent No.1
2. Ministry of Law & Justice

Through its Secretary
4th Floor, A Wing, Shashtri Bhawan,
NewDelhi 110001 … Respondent No.2
3. Institute of Company Secretaries of India

22, ICSI House, Lodhi Road,
Institutional Area, Lodi Colony,
New Delhi-110003.
Through Its Secretary
E-Mail:[email protected]
Contact No. 01145341070 … Respondent No. 3
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 32

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF
WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN NATURE OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT,
2
ORDER/DIRECTION TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION
DATED 03.01.2020 (ANNEXURE P-3) OF RESPONDENT
NO. 1 AS BEING ULTRA-VIRES OF THE PROVISION OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS IT IS VIOLATIVE OF
ARTICLE 14, 19 (1) G, 19 (6) AND 21 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND/OR ISSUANCE OF
COMPREHENSIVE GUIDELINES IN RESPECT OF
ROBUST MECHANISM FOR ENFORCEMENT OF
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE LACK OF WHICH LEADS
TO LARGE NUMBER OF COMPANIES BEING
INVOLVED IN FINANCIAL SHENANIGANS AND
MISFEASANCE OF THE PUBLIC MONEY BY THE
CORPORATE FRAUDSTER AND CAUSING HUGE LOSS
TO THE INTERESTS OF NATION AND/OR DIRECTION
TO FORM A HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE TO LOOK
INTO THE LAPSES WHICH LED TO THE CLOSURE OF
MORE THAN SIX LAKH OF COMPANIES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY AND FIX THE CORPORATE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY TO THOSE
PERPETRATORS WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
FORMATION/OPERATIONS OF THE FICTITIOUS AND
SHELL COMPANIES THROUGH WHICH THOUSANDS
OF CRORES WERE MANIPULATED TO THE
DETRIMENT OF FINANCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE OF
THE COUNTRY AND/OR ISSUE A DIRECTION TO THE
RESPONDENTS FOR ENSURING CORPORATE
COMPLIANCES THROUGH COMPANY SECRETARY IN
TERMS OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT
AS EXISTING EXEMPTIONS IN TERMS OF
3
COMPLIANCES OF THE COMPANIES ACT ARE
ARBITRARY AND WOULD LEAD TO CORPORATE
MISMANAGEMENT.
TO,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
& LORDSHIPS COMPANION JUSTICES
OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HUMBLE PETITION OF ABOVE-

NAMED PETITIONER
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. This public interest litigation is being preferred on behalf of the
petitioner under article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking
declaration of the notification of Respondent No. 01 dated
03.01.2020 and subsequent enforcement w.e.f. 01.04.2020 of
the notification as being ultra-vires and repugnant to the article
14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. In this respect it is
pertinently submitted that the said notification dated
03.01.2020 is constitutionally impermissible in as much as
there is no rational basis for the categorization and
classification for the purpose of requirement of regulatory
professionals i.e. Company Secretaries, as the necessity of
compliance of Companies Act is sacrosanct and absolute and
any compromise by way of classification on a ground of paid-
up capital cannot be treated as a reasonable classificationand
exempting the companies from the regulatory compliances on
the basis of irrational and unreasonable classification under the
garb of paid up capital is discriminatory in as much as it
infringes Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is settled law
that the test to be laid down for the validity of any law is that
4
the classification on which it is founded must be based upon
intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things
grouped together from others left out of the group and the
second test that differential in question must be reasonable with
relation to the object sought to be achieved by rule or statutory
provision in question. The impugned notification is not
standing to the scrutiny to the both tests as the intention of
classification on the basis of paid-up capital is to exempt the
group of the companies from the mandatory compliances of
laws cannot be said to be reasonable classification in the light
of the fact that the compliance of the law shall have to be
uniform irrespective of the size or turnover or any other criteria
of the companies. This Hon’ble Court had reiterated time and
again that any law enacted must fulfil the basic test as to
whether there is rational nexus of the classification with the
objective sought to be achieved by regulation 8A of Companies
Act. The un-reasonability of this exemption shall further
aggravate the corporate lawlessness and shall encourage
possible fraudster to commit offenses of syphoning of public
money by way of taking advantage of legal lacuna in form of
irrational exemption on the basis of paid-up capital. As such the
above said classification runs counter to the settle principles of
the doctrine of intelligible differentia. Hence, the said
notification is arbitrary and discriminatory in as much as the
spirit and intendment of notification is premised upon the
principle which discriminates the categories of companies and
as such it is inconsistent to the basic intention of the Companies
Act 2013, which mandates the requirement of Company
Secretary for compliance of law.In this respect it is submitted
5
that the Respondent No.3 had not taken fundamental canons of
jurisprudence in making distinction and classification relating
to the requirement of appointment of the Company Secretary in
a particular company for the purpose of due compliance of
affairs of companies in terms of provision of the Companies
Act 2013. The respondent No. 3 had also overlooked the
fundamental fact that the absence of company secretary in the
companies are compounding the regulatory mechanism and
exposing the company to all kind of financial manipulations
and irregularities, which are resulting the large number of the
companies to the cusp of their closure without any detection of
financial malpractices. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the
poor enforcement of the corporate governance in the companies
across the country, which are resulting in serious plummeting
of the level of transparency and fairness in the functioning of
the companies of our country which are also hitting the very
foundation of the financial sinews of our country’s economy.
Hence, the petitioner is seeking a comprehensive guideline for
evolving of the robust mechanism for regulating the proper
operations and effective enforcement of corporate governance
in all companies irrespective of their paid up capital in order to
minimize the incidences of financial and administrative
irregularities. Thus, the pathetic affairs of the administration
and enforcement of the companies law are debilitating the
entire financial atmosphere and environment of the working of
the companies across the country. The corporate lawlessness is
impacting on the overall financial fabric of the country. As
such, the introduction of said notification dated 03.01.2020 by
way of amendment in erstwhile provision under the law is
6
further eroding and undermining the regulatory compliances on
account of absence of effective mechanism to rein the illegally
rouge companies across the country.
1.A That the petitioner is a public spirited citizen of India and
has been involved in various societal and community
activities like promoting education among the excluded
and marginalized sections of the society by providing the
financial and infrastructural support to the remotest part of
the country. The petitioner had also founded Unmukt
Udaan Education Council which is dedicated towards
upliftment of the quality of education and educational
infrastructure in the rural and remote areas of the country.
The petitioner being a qualified company secretary fellow
member of Respondent No.3 is equally concerned with the
downfall of the quality of regulatory mechanism in the
companies, leading to malfeasance and misfeasance of the
most of the companies by motivated and selfish individuals
who are under the garb of the fictitious companies, are in
fact striking at the financial backbone of the country. With
the tightening of the regulatory mechanism through
introduction of Companies Act 2013 has brought about the
worsening rot to the light as more than six lakhs of
companies had been declared defunct on account of
various non-compliances and all such companies are lying
struck off. There is no account of rupees thousands of
crores being syphoned off through formation of fictitious
and fake companies in our country. Hence, the petitioner is
bringing the issue of regulation and enforcement of the
corporate governance in all companies across the country
7
by making Company Secretary as integral and inseparable
constituent of every companies irrespective of the paid-up
capital for the purpose of compliance and regulation. The
petitioner is completely taken off guard at the callous
discrimination and distinction in the matter of compliances
and regulations rendering the whole issue optional and
voluntary at the swift disposal of the officials of the
particular companies to utter disregard to the professional
competence of the company secretary who are legally
qualified by virtue of special enactment of statutory
provision of companies law. It is submitted that the
petitioner has already approached the respondents by
making the representation requesting immediate roll-back
of the said notification dated 03.01.2020 as the
classification carving out exemption is affront and
antithetical to the constitutional scheme of right to equality
and equal protection under the Constitution of India.
However, the contention raised in the said representation
remained un-responded as yet.
1.B The petitioner is related to many philanthropic acts and one
of the primary concern of the petitioner is to ensure the
enforcement of corporate governance in the industries with
the help of qualified Company Secretaries across the
country in order to streamlining the optimum utilization of
the corporate competence in the development of the
country and economic activities thereof. The petitioner has
been visiting faculty of various institutions for last several
years in various parts of the country. The petitioner is
equally connected in reformation of the antiquated
8
regulatory mechanism through the political process by
making representation to the authorities for remedial action
against existing anomalies crept in the system. In the past,
the petitioner has also been involved in the election
processes of Central Council Election of ICSI with pro-
bono commitment. The petitioner has unblemished record
of relentlessly contributing towards ensuring the rights of
the Company Secretaries across the country.
1.C The petitioner has no personal interest, or private/oblique
motive in filing the instant application. There is no civil,
criminal, revenue or any litigation involving against the
petitioner, which has or could have a legal nexus with the
issues involved in this petition.
1.D That the petitioner is filing this Writ Petition on his own
volition and he shall be liable to pay costs as ordered by
this Hon’ble Court in the event it is found out that this
petition is filed for any personal gain or oblique motive.
1.E That the Petitioner is a fellow member of Company
Secretary of India, and has been working in private sector
in a capacity of Executive Vice President (Corporate
Affairs) and Company Secretary and his social works are
purely self-driven for the cause of the public at large. The
annual income of petitioner is about Rs. 57,00,000/- per
annum. The email address of the Petitioner is
[email protected] and mobile no. +91-
9958299558. The Permanent account number of the
petitioner is APVPK2925C and aadhar number is
817436261986. The postal address of the petitioner
is22/11, Second Floor, Backside, Near Patel Park, West
9
Patel Nagar, New Delhi- 110008.
1.F The Petitioner has not filed any other Petition either in this
Hon’ble Court or in any other High Court seeking same
and similar directions as prayed for in thisPetition.
2. That it is submitted that the petitioner is having deep concern
at the future prospect of the Companies Secretaries as the
amendment of rule 8A is severely curtailing the rights of
employment of Company Secretary in companies across the
country. The petitioner is having further apprehension that
arbitrary classification by way of enhancement of paid-up
capital from Rs 5 crore to Rs 10 crore as a criterion for
requirement of Company Secretary for the purpose of
compliance is completely arbitrary and discriminatory as this
notification dated 03.01.2020 striking at the cardinal purpose of
regulation of the companies through the Companies
Secretaries. This illegal enhancement of paid-up capital is
arbitrary and classification thereof is discriminatory in as much
as this amendment implies illegal leverage and unjustified
discretion conferred to the companies in matter of regulation
and compliances. Such act of discrimination, further weakens
the regulatory necessity of a company by exempting from
requirement of the Company Secretaries or other compliances
for the purpose of the regulation and administration of the
companies across the country. It is beyond prudence of
common man that the legal compliance is being based upon the
selective exemption on the basis of paid-up capital of the
companies as the legislative intendments of the law is to ensure
the uniform compliances and regulation in all companies with
solitary aim to strengthen the financial discipline in the
10
corporate entities. The petitioner is basically avowed proponent
of transparency and fairness in functioning of the companies as
the companies are the backbone of the financial prosperity of
country. Hence, the petitioner is bringing these issues to the
notice of this Hon’ble Court for appropriate directions to plug
the statutory and legal loopholes in strengthening the corporate
governance across the country and the insertion of the
conditions by way of classification on the basis of paid-up
capital is clearly infringing article 14, 19 (1)(g) of the
Constitution of India as the condition imposed is arbitrary and
discriminatory and exemption thereof does not serve the basic
purpose of the Companies Law. It is further submitted that such
discrimination is defeating the whole purpose of compliance of
the companies laws as there must not be classification in terms
of compliances of law as whole statutory processes of the
Companies Act are being uniformly applied in their creation
and their operations throughout their existence. Hence, any
exemption from the compliances of companies laws is based
upon irrational logic and reasoning.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
3. That it is submitted that the MCA on 09.06.2014 notified
the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) 2014 with Rule 8A wherein the
Appointment of Company Secretaries in companies not
covered under rule 8A (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014. A company other than a
company covered under Rule 8 which has a paid-up capital
of five Crore rupees or more, shall have a whole-time
company secretary. (Notified on 09.06.2014). It is further
11
submitted that the ministry has issued notification dated
21.02.2019 having effect from 25.02.2019 for filing of “E-
FORM ACTIVE (INC-22A)” (Active Company Tagging
Identities and Verification) on or before 25.04.2019. This
Form was prepared by the ministry with exhaustive research
getting the whereabouts of the companies registered office,
KMPs, all statutory officials, auditors, cost auditors, M.D.,
company secretaries etc. and it was carrying the stringent
conditions for compliances which was too difficult to
continue the non-compliances. Besides, several critical
informationin controlling the company, it was asking the
complete PAN and membership number of the whole time
company secretary of the company. Such, stringent
provisions had interdicted the possibilities of omission and
commission being employed in registering fake and
fictitious companies across the country.
4. That it is submitted that the above said notification dated
21.02.2019 for filing of E-FORM ACTIVE (INC-22A) was
further extended to 15.06.2019 without any additional fee
and thereafter with additional fee of Rs 10,000/- vide
notification dated 25.04.2019. In this respect it is submitted
that the above said notification dated 21.02.2019 led to the
cartelization of unregulated motivated companies to thwart
any efforts to bring about law to regulate the companies
with stringent manners. It is further submitted that some of
such non-compliant companies registered their grievances to
the concerned authorities, protesting any kind of change in
existing compliance mechanism as there is awfully lack of
number of Company Secretaries with malafide intention
12
with sole motto of evading the statutory compliances.
5. That it is submitted that the ministry has issued letter dated
17.06.2019 to ICSI (Institute of Company Secretaries of
India- A statutory body under the Company Secretaries Act,
1980- Monitoring the profession of company secretaries and
Corporate Governance), forwarding the different letters
dated 04.04.2019, 09.04.2019, undated letters and emails of
16 individual, firms and companies raising their different
concerns before the ministry including grievances of few
one about not able to attract company secretary due to high
salary, affording salary of company secretary, exemption for
private companies with less turn over, non-availability if
company secretaries. Out of the above said16 grievances, 6
grievances were pertaining to non-availability of the
company secretary in the market. The roving grievances
were raised without any base to evade the compliance of the
appointment of company secretaries.
6. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.3 has addressed
individually all the grievances of the stake holders and have
stated that….
“In view of the aforesaid, keeping in mind the
present parameters for appointment of company
secretary which are framed by MCA after a lot of
public debate and deliberations are absolutely
aligned with the present requirements; and therefore,
need to be kept intact. Needless to mention that the
level of compliance as envisaged by the Government
is rising day by day.” It was specifically stated
“That, out of total active companies, i.e.
13
approximately, 11 Lakh companies, only 39,805
companies are required to appoint a whole time
company secretary. We wish to submit that as on 01st
July, 2019, ICSI has 58,690 company secretaries on
its register out of which only 10,644 are in practice.
Accordingly, sufficient numbers of company
secretaries are available to serve the corporate
India. Further, ICSI through its dedicated placement
cell provides placement services to corporate to meet
the demand and supply of the company secretaries
across the country”
A true copy of the reply of The Institute Of Company
Secretaries Of India dated 08.07.2019 is annexed herewith
and mark as ANNEXURE P-1 (Pg. 48 to 54).
7. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.1 has further
forwarded letter dated 08.07.2019 which was received by
the Respondent No.3 on 09.07.2019 containing 18 more
grievances sent by different stake holders for the comments
of the Respondent No.3. Out of the 18 grievances 12 were
not related to appointment of company secretaries and it was
pertaining to other concerns. Further, out of 18, 4 have
raised the grievances that they are not able to find a
company secretary or there is a deficit of members in the
market. These allegations were completely bogus and it has
been raised ulterior motives to continue the non-
compliances of the express provisions of law.The extent of
cartelization can be reflective of the fact that few grievances
from the motivated and entrenched corporates or their
representatives prompted the change of existing rules,
14
thereby raising the paid up capital as criterion to have a
desirability of the Company Secretaries in particular
companies for the compliance and regulation in the
companies.
8. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.3 hasfurther
addressed and made its comments individually on all the
grievances of the stake holders and reiterated that
“We, once again, reiterate that the present
parameters for appointment of company secretary
which are framed by the MCA after a lot of public
debate and deliberations are absolutely aligned with
the present requirements; and therefore, need to be
kept intact. Needless to mention that the level of
compliance as envisaged by the Government is rising
day by day. We Shall be pleased to provide any
further information or clarification in this regard on
A true copy of the reply of The Institute Of Company
Secretaries Of India dated 25.07.2019 is annexed herewith
and mark as ANNEXURE P-2(Pg. 55 to 58).
9. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.3 is statutory
body which regulates the profession of Companies
Secretaries across the county. It is submitted that it is an
apex body of the Companies Secretaries in respect of
education, training and conferring professional degree to the
Companies Secretaries. However, it is appalling to see that
the highest regulatory body is completely insensitive to the
systemic growth of the institution in conformity with the
changing times in terms of infrastructural development and
15
its effective participation in ensuring the corporate
governance through its members in co-ordination with
Respondent No.1.The Respondent No.3 has failed in its
statutory obligations to streamline the institute to the
growing needs of their students and associate members.
Thus, there is an urgent requirement of overhauling the
entire administrative and decision making bodies in order to
make it effective and efficient which can withstand the test
of present time.
10. That it is submitted that Respondent No.1had amended the
Rule 8A of the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration
of Managerial Personnel) 2014 in a hasty manner without
considering the suggestions and recommendations sent by
the statuary body i.e. Respondent No.3, without estimating
the outbreak and consequences of the amendment over
members Institute of Companies Secretary and Corporate
Governance. The material available on record prima-facie
shows that amendment passed in a hasty manner
compromising the necessary checks and balances.
11. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.1 had issued the
notification dated 03.01.2020 stating that “Every private
company which has a paid up share capital of Rs 10 Crores
or more shall have a whole time company secretary. The
consequence thereof, all the public and private company
having the paid up capital of less than Rs 10 Crores were
totally exempted from the appointment of whole time
company secretary. As per the report dated 01.01.2015
containing the data as on 31.12.2014, there were 11,532
companies having the paid up capital of Rs 83,376.46
16
Crores under the bracket of paid up capital of above Rs 5
Crores to Rs 10 Crores. Hence, a big question mark has
come on the employment of approximately more than
11,000 company secretaries, great compromise with the
Corporate Governance of these companies and have made
the impact on 3.5 Lakhs students on the role of the ICSI,
who is seeing their future in the field of Corporate
Governance and company secretaries and hence the protest
has started across the country. A true copy of the
notification dated 03.01.2020 is being annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE P-3. (Pg. 59 to 60)
12. That it is submitted that as the paid-up capital limits has
increased in spite of the comments and efforts of the
Respondent No.3 and the members has started questioning
the role and responsibilities of the institute and its council
members, it has issued a letter to the members stating that..
“It was because of your institutes continuous
involvements and representations, the enhancements
in limits has been limited to Rs 10 Crores only and
not beyond.”
Further, it was also stated that ICSI is committed to
provide whole hearted support to its registered
members and the students and will take all necessary
measures as may be required. It has also appealed to
the members and students.
“We earnestly appeal all our members and students
not to post any derogatory or defamatory remarks
against the regulators, stakeholders or Institute on
the social media or by any other means, keeping in
17
view its far reaching impact on the credibility of the
profession.”
So much so that the institute has threatened its members and
the students from making the protests and questioning the
failure of the Respondent No.3 and its councils and have
restricted the freedom of speech and expression which are
guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
The Respondent No.3 and its council members have also
threatened the registered members for the disciplinary
proceedings if they protests/represents against the said
notification. A True copy of the letter dated 08.01.2020
issued by The Institute Of Company Secretaries Of India is
annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-4 (Pg. 61
to 64 ).
13. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.1 has again
issued the advisory to all the regional council members,
chapters and others constituents stating that …
“It is advised to refrain from making any derogatory
or defamatory comment against the MCA or the ICSI.
Further you are advised from refrain the facilitating
the demonstration by the members and the students.
Also the regional councils/Chapters/Units are
advised not to make any representation in this regard
at their end directly to any authority /forum, as the
institute has already in process of once again taking
up the matter with the MCA. So by these advisory
again the members were restricted from raising the
voice on the said change and protest thereof.
A true copy of the letter dated 09.01.2020 issued by The
Institute Of Company Secretaries Of India to its members is
enclosed and marked herewith as ANNEXURE P-5 (Pg. 65
to 66).
18
14. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.3 being
aggrieved and dissatisfied with the amendment of rule 8A
(Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial Personnel)
Rules 2014 vide notification dated 03.01.2020, sent a
representation with it’s suggestions vide letter dated
10.01.2020 and concluded by stating that...
Quote
“….the companies have proper and significant
business operations which triggers compliance with
various laws. In absence of services of Whole Time
Company Secretaries, these active companies may be
exposed to greater regulatory risk and non-
compliance. Further in such companies, public
interest is also involved and following good
governance practices becomes more significant….”.
“Amendment has caused a apprehension in the mind
of our members and students and there has been lots
of resentment in the fraternity across the country.”
The Respondent No.3 has requested for further amendment
in to the rule taking into account the following suggestions:
SUGGESTION -1:
Every company which has a paid up share capital of more
than Rs 5 Crores and up to Rs 10 Crores and
a. Turnover of hundred Crores rupees or more; or
b. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or
public financial institutions of one hundred crores
rupees or more;
Explanation- For the purpose of this sub rule, the paid up
share capital, turnover, or outstanding loans or borrowings
as the case may be, existing on the last date of latest audited
financial statement may be taken into account.
a. A paid up share capital of ten crores rupees or more;
b. Turnover of one hundred crores rupees or more; or
c. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or
19
rupees or more.
d. Shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary
Explanation:- For the purpose of this sub rule, the paid up
share capital, turnover, or outstanding loans or borrowings
as the case may be, existing on the last date of latest audited
Unquote
A true copy of the letter dated 10.01.2020 is annexed
herewith and marked as ANNEXUREP-6 (Pg. 67 to 70).
15. That it is submitted that the petitioner not being satisfied by
the reasoning and the submissions of the institute and its
officials have requested for open house sessions or
presentation before the Council for the strong submission
before the Ministry. However, the said letter remain un-
responded from the ICSI. A true Copy of the letter dated
11.01.2020 submitted to ICSI by the petitioner is enclosed
and marked herewith as ANNEXURE P-7 (Pg. 71 to 73).
16. That it is submitted that the ICSI have re approached for the
further amendment in the rule vide letter dated 03rd
February, 2020with the prayer that to kindly consider
further amendment in Rule 8A of the Companies
Rules, 2013, taking into consideration inserting the
following in place of the existing provision:
or
b. Net worth of one hundred crores rupees or more; or
rupees or more; or
d. Turnover of two hundred fifty crore rupees or more
Shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary .
Explanation:- For the purpose of this rule, the paid up share
20
capital, net worth, outstanding loans or borrowings or
turnover as the case may be existing on the last date of
latest audited financial statement may be taken into account.
Every company which ceases to be a company covered
under Rule 8A for three consecutive financial years shall
not be required to appoint company secretary till such time
it meets the criteria specified in rule 8A (Appointment and
Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014.
A true Copy of the letter dated 03.02.2020 is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE P– 8(Pg. 74 to 76).
17. That it is submitted that the impact of impugned notification
can also be seen by the act of one of the defaulter company
who sent grievance to the MCA. i.e. M/s. Kaytee Corp. Pvt
Ltd. who for the first time since 2013 appointed a C.S. on
10.06.2019 and subsequently removed. The MCA current
status shows CS resigned on 01.02.2020 as per the Form
DIR 12. It is pertinent to say that unlike this entity all other
entity having paid up capital between 5 cr. to 10 cr. will also
remove already appointed C.S. A true copy of the Form
DIR 12 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE P-9 (Pg. 77 to
82).
18. That it is submitted that as per the annual report of MCA
(Ministry of Corporate Affairs) out of total 18,73,044
companies, 6,70,018 companies were closed [35.77% (more
than one third) of the total companies] due to non-
compliances/ serious governance issues and only 11,56,374
companies were ACTIVE companies as on 31.03.2019.
Hence, such situation requires the attention of this Hon’ble
Court for taking the cognizance on serious lapses in
Corporate Governance. A true copy of the relevant extracts
of annual report 2018-2019 of Ministry of Corporate Affairs
21
is being annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-
10(Pg. 83 to 84).
19. That it is further submitted that there were 33 Lakhs DINs
(Director Identification Number) in the registry and around
15.88 Lakhs DIN holders have filed DIR KYC as on
30.11.2018 (48.121% Directors remained non complied
inviting questions on their sanctity, existence, and
traceability). The non-availability/ non-compliance by the
Directors invites the cognizance of this Hon’ble Court on
Corporate Governance of Corporate India. A true copy of
the relevant extracts of annual report 2018-2019 of Ministry
of Corporate Affairs is being annexed herewith and marked
as ANNEXURE P- 11(Pg. 85 to 86).
20. That is also submitted that the attention of this Hon’ble
Court is drawn towards this fact that approximately one
third of the Corporate India remain in non-complied zone
for number of years resulted the Government has decided to
close approximately one third of the total registered
companies as discussed above. The details of non-filing of
Annual Accounts and Annual Returns of the companies
during various financial years are being set out as under for
ready reference of this Hon’ble Court indicating the pathetic
plight of the compliances of law and flouting the
regulations.
Sl. Financial No. of Non filing of Non filing of
No. Year Active Annual Annual
Companies Accounts Returns
(% out of (% out of Total
22
Total Active Active
Companies) Companies)
1. 2013-14 9,52,433 30.62% 30.38%
2. 2014-15 10,22,011 24.55% 25.10%
3. 2015-16 10,88,780 37.91% 40.05%
4. 2016-17 11,69,303 27.22% 30.04%
5. 2017-18 11,67,858 18.73% 19.69%
6. 2018-19 11,56,374 1.36% 4.39%
21. That it is submitted that the listed companies which have
collected the funds from the Initial Public Offering (IPO)
and further public offer have suddenly vanished as a result
of which there is huge financial jolt to the economic growth
of our country and proved to be a great loss to the common
investors. It is no longer secret that those listed
companieshave vanished after public issue during the year
1992-2005 and out of which 238 listed companies identified
as Vanished Companies only 161 such companies had been
traced out and rest of the 77 are still untraced. It is further
submitted that the extent of lawlessness is further evidenced
by the fact that as on 31.03.2019, there were approximately
177 vanished companies which were listed on Bombay
Stock Exchange (BSE) and same is not traceable. A true
Copy of the list of vanishing companies as on 31.03.2019 is
being annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-
12(Pg. 87 to 90).
22. That it is submitted that as per one case study on white
collar crime available on public domain (International
Journal of Engineering Development and Research) “One of
the major havoc that is created in present times is because of
23
mysterious disappearances of corporations. In this respect it
is submitted that out of approximately 5651 companies
listed in the Bombay Stock Exchange, 2750 had been
vanished. It is pertinent to mention that one out of two
companies that comes to the stock exchange to raise Crores
of rupees from the innocent investors’ looting their money
and runs away with further compliances. It is also submitted
that about 11 million investors had invested Rs 10,000
Crores in those 2750 companiesand unfortunate
predicaments that those investors feel cheated and looted by
the said vanished companies and the respondents is mute
spectators to the circumstances being confronted by those
innocent investors.
23. That it is submitted that as per the report published in news
clippings Live Mint dated 12.06.2019 “Bank frauds worth
Rs. 2.05 Trillion happened in last 11 years, reveals RBI
data”. Over 50 thousand frauds hit banks in India FY09-
FY19, RBI said in response to an RTI query by them. It
reflects serious lapses in Corporate Governance and requires
the immediate indulgence of this Hon’ble Court on
Corporate Governance. A true copy of the news clippings
dated 12.06.2019 published in Live Mint is being annexed
herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-13(Pg. 91 to 94)
24. That it is submitted that as per one report, ET BUREAU
dated 30.08.2019 available in the public domain “Indian
Banking System detected Rs 71,500 Crores worth of frauds
in FY2018-19 which to put in scale each slightly more than
the Rs 71,000 Crores recapitalization package planned by
the Government to revive the health of its public sector
24
bank. It is further submitted that the report of the Press Trust
of India dated 04.06.2019 “Reserve Bank of India in an RTI
reply has disclosed approximately more than 6800 cases of
bank frauds involving an unprecedented Rs71,500 Crores
were reported in FY 2018-19 as against a total of 5,916 such
cases in FY2017-18 involving Rs 41,167.03 Crores. A true
copy of the news published in The Economics Times dated
30.08.2019 is being annexed herewith as ANNEXURE P-
14(Pg. 95 to 96).
25. That it submitted that as per the data base of the Annual
Report of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs in last five years
from FY 2013 TO FY 2017-18 more than one third
companies of India have failed in filing the Annual Returns
and even Annual Accounts thereof. However, the total
prosecution for non-filing of Annual Returns under the
Companies Act, 2013 and The Companies Act, 1956 comes
to only 403 which is apparently reflecting that
approximately 2,29,984 companies have not filed the
Annual Return against year 2017-18.In this respect it is
further submitted that the percentage of prosecution comes
to 0.17% of total prosecution against the financial year
2018-2019. It is further submitted that similarly the total
prosecution filed from April, 2018 to March, 2019 are
against 632companies only for non-filing of annual accounts
(Balance Sheet) which comes only 0.28% of total non-
complied companies. However, approximately 2,18,738
companies have not filed their Annual Accounts FY 2017-
18. A true copy of the relevant extracts of Annual Reports
of 2018-2019 of Ministry of Corporate Affairs is being
25
annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-15(Pg. 97 to
98).
26. That it is submitted that that as per the Annual Report of the
Respondent No.1, there are total pending prosecutions
across the Country is 33,965 against 21,373 companies.
However, around 6,21,966 companies have been declared
defunct/ struck off by the ROC and actions had been taken
only against around 21,373 companies in the past which
comes around 3.43% only. A true copy of the relevant
extracts of Annual Reports of 2018-2019 of Ministry of
Corporate Affairs is being annexed here with as ANNEXURE
P-16(Pg. 99 to 101).
27. That it is submitted that the petitioner has already
approached the respondents by making the representation
requesting immediate roll-back of the said notification dated
03.01.2020 as the classification carving out exemption is
affront and antithetical to the constitutional scheme of right
to equality and equal protection under the Constitution of
India. However, the contention raised in the said
representation remained un-responded as yet. A true copy of
the representation dated 13.07.2020 is being annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE P-17. (Pg. 102 to 175).
28. That it is submitted that there were more than 18,73,044
companies in India and after closure of non-complied
companies around 11,56,374 companies are found to be
active companies as on 31.03.2019. It is further submitted
that it has been noticed that there is no concept of random
checks on the Corporate Governance or suo-moto
inspections, visits of different corporate even sample check.
26
29. That it is submitted that Respondents have taken the
initiative to weed out inactive companies and disqualified
directors, protect the public money, overcome the financial
irregularities and increase the effectiveness of the
governance mechanism. India is perhaps the only country
where a form like INC-22A (ACTIVE) is introduced. The
MCA has notified form no. INC-22A- ACTIVE (Active
Company Tagging Identities and Verification) and have
asked for all substantial details ensuring whereabouts of the
company, its management, Company Secretaries, Auditors
etc. and have asked for email id with OTP confirmation,
Photographs of registered office with directors/ KMP with
longitude and latitude, complete where about of all
directors, complete details of statutory auditors, complete
details of cost auditors, complete details of Managing
Directors or CEO or Managers or Whole Time Directors,
Company Secretary if applicable, CFO, details of filing of
balance sheets, Annual return for the financial year 2017-18
duly signed by stated officials and along with their
certifications. It was also stated that, if the company does
not intimate the said particulars, the company shall be
marked as “ACTIVE- non-compliant” on or after 26th
April, 2019 and shall be liable for action under Sub-section
(9) of section 12 of the Act: Provided also that no request
for recording the following event based information or
changes shall be accepted by the Registrar from such
companies marked as “ACTIVE non- compliant”, unless
“e-Form ACTIVE” is filed.
30. That it is submitted that as the above said initiatives of the
27
respondents have left no place for the violators and non-
compliances they have created a cartel and started raising
the concern for non-availability of the company secretaries
or the costing or the various false and frivolous issues and
have created a cartel to evade from the express provision of
law for appoint of company secretaries and also to evade
from providing the other substantial details to be provided
to the MCA in the name of non-availability of the company
secretaries making it as amohra for continued non
compliances, not only this some of the professionals have
raised this issue wrongly on the basis of professional
biasness.
31. That it is further submitted that there were 35,158 Company
Secretaries in India as on 31st March, 2014 and there were
approx. 27,785 companies above the pad-up capital of Rs 5
Crores or more. There was no issue of less number of
company secretaries in the market in the past rather the
members have faced difficulties in getting the job due to the
evading attitudes of this important provisions of hiring of
company secretaries in the past. In this respect it is
submitted that from the above said report it is ambit clear
that there was no issue pertaining to less number of
company secretaries in the market.
32. That it is submitted that the Companies Act, 2013 has
replaced the Companies Act, 1956 with the core objective
of self-governance, great transparency and being more
stringent towards the violation of the provisions of the
enactment. Since, 2009 all the companies having the paid
up capital of Rs 5 Crores or more, it was mandatory for
28
them to hire the company secretary for ensuring the
compliances of the Companies Act and other enactments
and watch the interest of the investors, company and other
stake holders. As per the report dated 01.01.2015, data
dated 31.12.2014, there were 11,532 companies holding the
total paid up capital of Rs 83,376.46 Crores. The above said
amendment is not only serious compromise with the
Corporate Governance of those companies rather also
impacts the employment and livelihood of more than 11
thousand company secretaries across the country and more
than 4 Lakhs students across the country preparing for
being the member s of the ICSI.
33. That it is submitted that said arbitrary amendment is in the
teeth of Article 14, 19(1)g and 21 of the Constitution of
India. The amendment is arbitrary being passed without
ascertaining any need, cause of action and without
application of mind, ignoring the representations sent by the
Statuary body i.e. Institute of Companies Secretary
(“I.C.S.I.”). It is pertinent to mention that the comparative
study of the rule 8A (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014 and subsequent rule of
year 2020 of the Companies (Appointment and
Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 are set
out as under : -
OLD RULE w.e.f. NEW RULE w.e.f.
31.03.2014 01.04.2020
A company other than a Every private company
company covered under which has a paid-up share
29
Rule 8 which has a capital of ten Crore rupees or
paid-up capital of five more shall have a whole –
Crore rupees or more, time company Secretary. [As
shall have a whole-time per this amendment effective
company secretary. from which was notified on
(notified on 03.01.2020 effective from
09.06.2014) [Since, 01.04.2020 , there is no
2009 as per the requirement of having the
provisions of Company Secretary for the
Companies Act, 1956 companies having the paid
all the companies up capital less than Rs 10
having the paid up Crores. As on 31.03.2014,
capital of Rs 5 Crores approx. 11, 532 companies
or more were are falling within the bracket
mandatory required to of Rs 5 Cores to Rs 10
hire Whole Time Crores.
Company Secretary.]
34. That it is further submitted that the petitioner is constrain to
raises an objection for enhancement of financial limit for
engaging Company Secretary from Rs 5 crore to Rs 10
crore being the serious compromise with the Corporate
Governance. It is further submitted that the said
appointment of the company secretaries was fully effective
from 09th June, 2014 vide Rule 8 and 8A, of Companies
Rules. 2014 and Section 203 of Companies Act, 2013 was
effective since beginning and Rule 8A was also notified
with effect from 09th June, 2014. But none of the corporate
across the country has raised any issues as such and the
30
habitual violator has opted for non complying the same and
have never raised this issue at any time in the past and have
non- complied the expressed provisions fromthe year 2015-
2019.
35. That it is submitted that the Companies Amendment Act,
1974, Sec. 383 A was inserted in the Companies Act, 1956
stating that “383A. CERTAIN COMPANIES TO HAVE
SECRETARIES:
(1) Every company [having such paid-up share capital as may
be prescribed] shall have a whole time secretary, and
where the Board of directors of any such company
comprises only two directors, neither of them shall be the
secretary of the company.[Provided that every company not
required to employ a whole time secretary under sub-
section (1) and having a paid-up share capital of ten Lakhs
rupees or more shall file with the Registrar a certificate
from a secretary in whole time practice in such form and
within such time and subject to such conditions as may be
prescribed, as to whether the company has complied with
all provisions of this Act and a copy of such certificate shall
be attached with Board's report referred to in section 217.]
It can be evident that at that time the profession was
nascent stage and the members were less hence the criteria
for hiring of company secretaries was considered as Rs 25
Lakhs paid up capital which has gone to Rs 5 Crores by
several changes in due course. The Ministry of Corporate
Affairs (MCA) has introduced Companies Secretaries Act,
1980, “An act to make provisions for the regulation and the
development of the profession of Company Secretaries.”
31
and the Institute of Companies Secretaries of India was
incorporated as statutory body under the supervision and
control of Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA).
The paid up capital of the company represents the
ownership of the company and the ratio of its contribution
by different equity share holders. Even a company with the
minimum paid up capital has great opportunities for
extending the business with the help of the debt, loans,
financial assistance of the different institutions, corporate
and can have big turn over in the market. It should also be
noted that as per the current practice very small amount of
investments are being considered in the paid up capital and
the balance funds being treated as share premium as a part
of reserve and surplus. For understanding recently Reliance
Industries issued share at Rs. 1250/- (approx..) out of which
only 10 was invested in paid-up capital and rest went to
reserves and surplus, in this transaction company’s paid
capital increased only by Rs. 10 whereas money invested
by the shareholder is Rs. 1250/- (per share), hence any
figure which denotes paid-up capital not necessarily
denotes the actual amount invested by a shareholder.
Further, in the past TCS has issued shares of face value of
Rs 1 (paid up capital value Rs 1) in Rs. 700, so here by the
investment of Rs 700 the paid up capital will increased by
only Rs 1 and Rs 699 will be share premium and will be the
part of reserve and surplus.
36. That it is submitted that the below mentioned data of the
companies are used for illustrative purpose to show entities
having huge turnover with no compulsory company
32
secretary as paid up capital is below the limit to have
compulsory C.S.
Paid up capital Turnover
S. Name of the
(INR) (INR)
No Company
approx. approx.
1. Apple India Pvt Ltd 3,50,020 13048 Cr.
2. Google India Pvt Ltd 1,07,38,790 9338 Cr.
3. HP (India) Pvt. Ltd 2,80,31,840 500 Cr
Microsoft Corp.
4. 2,41,14,760 7301 Cr.
(India) Pvt Ltd
Bikanervala Foods
5. 85,00,000 4000 Cr.
Pvt ltd
Rolls Royce India 100-500
6. 1,03,72,70
Pvt Ltd Cr.
HimalayaDrug Co.
7. 1,00,200 1800 Cr.
Pvt. Ltd.
Therefore, in view of the data reproduced, it can be said
that Paid-up capital of the company is one of the criteria to
represent the size of the company other than turnover, net
worth, loans and borrowings. Company even with less
paid-up capital can have large economic activity and
turnover. It can be said that the value of Rs. 5 crore paid-up
capital is enough for carrying various large activities with
or without the help of the various banks, NBFCs, financial
institutions and other financial support and hence the
requirement of the company secretary for the capital of Rs.
5 Crore or more is fully justified.
Therefore, even a company with a small paid up capital can
33
have huge turn over and it deals with various banks and
financial institutions. It has also been noticed in the past
that small corporate entities are more utilized for ulterior
motives being either fake, fabricated and have been created
for malicious intent or objective and therefore more
governance is needed in these companies to avoid its mis-
utilization. It have been noticed that various companies
remains the part of the white collar crimes or have been
utilized for malicious, illegal economic activities. The
striking of the company or declaring a defunct without any
action gives very bad message to the public at large.
37. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.1 in year 2014
had notified Companies (Appointment and Remuneration
of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 which got notified on
31.03.2014 and vide Rule 8, where every listed company
and every other public company having a paid up share
capital of 10 crore or more shall have a whole time key
managerial personnel. The said rule being arbitrary resulted
in an amendment pursuant to which Government had
further notified an amended notification dated 09.06.2014
by inserting rule 8A (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014 which states the limit
for appointment of Company Secretaries i.e. 5 crore for
engagement of whole time Companies Secretaries.
However, after the commencement of the Companies Act
2013, the provision for the appointment of the whole-time
company secretaries was in effect vide Rule 8 and 8A, of
Companies (Appointment and Remuneration Of
Managerial Personnel) Rules. 2014 and Section 203 of the
34
Companies Act 2013. It is important to mention here that
none of the corporate across the country had raised any
issue till the commencement of INC- 22A in the year 2019,
pursuant to which 17 defaulter entities showed their
inability to engage C.S. and to cover-up their default sent
grievance with concocted stories before the MCA.
38. That it is submitted that even Respondent No.3 vide its
letter dated 08.07.2019 had addressed M.C.A. in response
to the grievance forwarded by the stakeholders and have
stated that the present parameters for appointment of
Company Secretary framed by MCA are absolutely aligned
with the present requirements; and therefore, need to be
kept intact.It is important to mention here that before
amending the limit under Rule 8 A, Ministry of Corporate
Affairs had taken discussed and took opinion over the issue
from I.C.S.I. But none was appreciated. It is pertinent to
mention that Respondent No.3 had suggested to
Respondent No.1 for adding the criteria of turnover and net
worth in addition to the paid-up capital. However, the same
could not be done due to the reason not known. It is
pertinent to mention here that the number of active
companies with the paid-up capital is as under (Report
dated 01.01.2015, data dated 31.12.2014.) The summarized
tabular form of the relevant data are set out as under for
comparing the present status of the health of the companies.
Distribution of
Paid up capital Paid-up
Active Companies
Range Capital
with respect to
35
Paid-up Capital
Total No. of
Companies
Above 1 crore to
2 crore 32,207 47,709.94
2 cr to 5 cr 29,390 96,959.99
5 cr to 10 cr 11,532 83,376.46
10 cr to 25 cr 8,635 136,177.40
25 cr to 100cr 5,279 253,894.63
100 cr to 500 cr 1,752 370,176.43
500 cr to 1000 cr 288 202,021.28
Above 1000
crore 299 967,384.54
As per the said report the number of companies in the

bracket of paid up capital above Rs. 5 crores to Rs 10 crores
were 11,532.It is important to mention here that figures in
above table pertains till 31.12.2014 and as of now numbers
would have increased hence impugned notification not only
compromising with Corporate Governance for minimum
11,532 companies but will also effect approx. 12000 C.S.
engaged in those companies.
39. That it is submitted that the Respondent No.3 being
dissatisfied with the said amendment and rejection of its
repeated proposals sent a letter dated 10.01.2020 for further
amendment in the rule and gave suggestions.
QUESTION OF LAW
40. That it is submitted that in the circumstances mentioned herein
above and below, the pertinent question of law emerges for
36
consideration and determination which are set out as under:-
(a) Whether, the notification dated 03.01.2020 is ultra-vires the
Article 14 of the Constitution of India as the classification
for employability of the Companies Secretaries on the basis
of enhanced paid-up capital for regulation and
administration of the Companies is arbitrary and
discriminatory in as much as carving out an exemption
below the specified paid-up capital of the companies
invalidate the intelligible differentia?
(b) Whether, the existing exemptions in terms of Section-92 of
the companies Act 2013 and Companies (Management and
administration) Rules 2014 in compliances by the company
under the companies act, should be made mandatory
through company secretary irrespective of the paid-up
capital of the companies as such exemptions strikes at the
root of article 14 of the Constitution of India?
(c) Whether, there is an urgent need for comprehensive
guidelines for evolving robust mechanism in order to ensure
proper and effective regulatory and supervisory apparatus in
the country as lack of effective mechanism is exposing the
companies to the financial irregularities and administrative
manipulations resulting into financial indiscipline across the
country and the incidences of closure of more than six lakhs
companies are the result of lack of mechanism of corporate
governance?
(d) Whether, the high powered committee is required to look
into the culpability of thousands of directors of defunct
companies who had eaten into the financial vitality of the
country are still rooming free without any kind of legal
37
actions as the respondent No.1 had not taken any effective
action against those directors. The Respondent No.1 is
responsible for taking selective legal actions against the
defunct companies?
GROUNDS
41. That it is submitted that being dissatisfied and aggrieved by the
arbitrary notification dated 03.01.2020 of respondent, having
no rationality of purpose behind the amendment and thereby
enhancing the limit of paid-up capital from Rs 5 core to Rs 10
crore for the purpose of compliances and regulations through
the Company Secretary,defies thepreposition of intelligible
differentia between enactment and its acquisition of cardinal
object of regulation and administration of companies across the
country. As such, act of the respondents is ultra-vires of the
article 14 of the Constitution of India and is liable to be
quashed on this ground alone. In addition to above the
petitioner being aggrieved by the prevalence of malfeasance
and misfeasance on account of unregulated environment and
prevalent lacunae in enforcement of corporate governance in
the corporate entities across the country leading to financial
manipulation with unfailing regularity. Hence, the petitioner is
approaching this Hon’ble Court for consideration of the above
said issues and appropriate direction thereof on the inter-alia
various grounds including the following grounds as mentioned
herein bellow :-
(a) Because, the notification dated 03.01.2020 of respondent is
arbitrary and discriminatory in as much as it infringes the
settled proposition of law of intelligible differentia and that
it is ultra-vires the article 14 of the Constitution of India as
38
such classification is not permissible having no nexus to the
object to be achieved thereby infringing the right to equality
as the said exemption from the compliance is unreasonable
and arbitrary. As such the said notification is liable be
quashed in the interest of justice.
(b) Because, thesaid notification dated 03.01.2020 is
completely opposed to the rationality test under the
Constitution of India. Hence the notification is completely
impermissible as it is striking at very root of Article 14 of
the Constitution of India. In this respect, it is pertinently
submitted that the said notification is devoid of rational
nexus to the object to be achieved by the legislature in terms
of compliance and regulation of the companies across the
country. The classification sought to be made by
introduction of rule 8 A is intended to discriminate amongst
the companies on the basis of paid-up capital and there is no
requirement of certification by Company Secretaries in
terms of section-92 of Companies Act 2013. This
notification clearly exempts the companies below the
specified limit of paid-up capital from the requirement of
regulations and supervision of the companies through
Companies Secretaries. Therefore, the said notification is
suffering from two infirmities which is capable of hitting the
very foundation of structural modus oprendai of the
functioning of the companies under the rule of law. As such,
the said notification is constitutionally impermissible and is
liable to be quashed.
(c) Because, the said notification dated 03.10.2020 also suffers
from vice of discrimination in as much as the company has
39
been given unbridled and unfettered power to manage the
company to the utter disregard of the requirement of
regulatory professionals like Company Secretaries in a
proper professional and legal manner. This leverage of
discretion implies the complete freedom of manipulation on
the part of noncomplying companies to take advantage of
the need of regulation under the supervision of Company
Secretaries. As such, this discrimination is not based upon
rational thinking towards the objective of the legislation and
the said notification dated 03.01.2020 is liable to be
quashed.
(d) Because, there is complete lack of enforcement of the
corporate governance in the companies which are majorly
impacting and affecting at all levels of their functioning and
the role of the Company Secretary assumes utmost
importance in ensuring the compliance of regulations and
adherence of corporate laws and other enactments in the
entire operational levels of the companies. That is to say that
the Company Secretary is the brain of a company which
propels the company with due compliance of law and other
enactments to be legally compliant so that the companies
may be functioning in accordance with the conformity of the
settled law. Hence, this notification is glaringly overlooking
all the aspects of corporate governance in operation of the
companies. As such, the said notification dated 03.01.2020
is liable to be quashed as it being repugnant to its
constitutionality test on the basis of intelligible differentia.
Hence, the said notification is liable to be quashed.
(e) Because, the Respondents have not taken any effective
40
measures in bringing the guilty directors of the defunct
companies which were forcefully closed on account of non-
compliance of the companies laws. The number of
companies which had been closed with enactment of new
Companies Law, 2013, are approximately more than six
lakh companies.However, the respondent appears to have
forgotten the requirement of bringing the guilty directors of
those defunct companies to face justice. Further, there is no
investigation carried out against those directors for the
purpose of looking into all aspects of dis-functionality and
the financial damages being caused by those defaulted
directors. Thus, there is an urgent requirement of formation
of high powered committee to look into all aspects and
dimensions of irregularities and the number of defaulted
persons involved in syphoning of the money under the
fraudulent and deceptive manner.
(f) Because, the regulatory environment of the corporate
entitiesof our country are exposed to serious vulnerability of
financial manipulations and thousands of litigations in
various courts of the country serves an illustration to the
extent of manipulation of the public money which is taken
on the name of the companies but ultimately is lost in the
labyrinth of procedural compliances without fixing the
responsibility and accountability of those defaulted
companies.
(g) Because, the said notification dated 03.01.2020 has been
published by amending the erstwhile provision of rule 8A
Rules 2014 of is without any basis of
41
quantifiabledataorstudyto show whether amendment will be
beneficial for the purpose of good corporate governance.
The whimsical way in which the said notification dated
03.01.2020 wasbrought only on the basis of grievances of
few stakeholders is completely devoid of any justification.
Hence, the said arbitrary notification is liable to be quashed.
42. That it is submitted that the source of information to the
Petitioner are the Annual Reports of Ministry of Corporate
Affairs, 2013-14 onwards and website of MCA, Annual
Reports of Institute of Company Secretaries of India,
Thecopy of representation/ letters made by Institute of
Company Secretaries of India and ICSI available on the
website of ICSI and public domain. It is further submitted
that the other information available in the public domain and
downloaded from the relevant websites and with the help of
Google Search. The petitioner declares that there is no other
remedy then to file the present PIL before this Hon’ble
Court. The petitioner has protested and raised the concern
pertaining to above issues before the Institute of Company
Secretaries of India and have also offered for making the
presentation before them which was not responded by the
ICSI. The entire representation on the above issue by the
Respondent No.3 before the Ministry of Corporate Affairs
were not considered and the rule 8A (Appointment and
Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014 was
amended without considering the said representation of the
Respondent No.3. Even after the said notification dated
03.01.2020, several letters were issued by Respondent No.3
to Respondent No.1. Therefore, as a common citizen of this
42
country no relief left rather than approaching this Hon’ble
Court for issuance of appropriate direction to the
respondents in the interest of public at large.
43. That it is submitted that the immediate attention of this
Hon’ble Court towards serious compromise with Corporate
Governance, due diligence and compliances impacting the
economic growth of our country in the interest of all the
stake holders connected with corporate entities and also
towards all the banks, financial institutions and common
people of our country who deals with the corporate entities.
44. That it is submitted that the issue raised herein above by the
petitioner is neither dealt with nor decided by any Court of
law at the instance of the petitioner or to the best of his
knowledge.
GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF
45. That it is submitted that the immediate stay is sought in the
facts and circumstances mentioned above including that
facts that the arbitrary amendment in rule 8A (Appointment
and Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014
vide notification dated 03.01.2020 and its subsequent
enforcement wef 01.04.2020 as the said impugned
notification dated 03.01.2020 is opposed to the intendment
of the companies law as regulation of the companies are
corner stone to protect the companies from mismanagement
and non-compliance of statutory provisions. In absence of
stay on the said notification dated 03.01.2020, there are
chances of wide spread financial manipulation at every
levels of operations of the companies. Further, it will have
serious impact and compromise with the Corporate
43
Governance, which is detrimental to the economic growth of
the Nation.
46. That it is submitted that the in view of the above facts and
circumstances the said notification dated 03.01.2020 is bad
in law with constitutional vires. There is manifest
arbitrariness in the saidNotification.
PRAYER
In view of the above and in the interests of justice, it is most
respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(a) To quash the notification dated 03.01.2020 of Respondent
No. 1 as being ultra-vires of the provision of the
Constitution of India as it is violative of article 14, 19 (1) g,
19 (6) and 21 of the Constitution of India.
And/or
(b) Direct the respondents for issuance of comprehensive
guidelines in respect of robust mechanism for enforcement
of corporate governance lack of which leads to large number
of companies being involved in financial shenanigans and
misfeasance of the public money by the corporate fraudster
and causing huge loss to the interests of nation.
And/or
(c) Direct the respondents to form a high powered committee to
look into the lapses which led to the closure of more than
six lakh of companies across the country and fix the
corporate accountability and responsibility to those
perpetrators who were responsible for the
formation/operations of the fictitious and shell companies
through which thousands of crores were manipulated to the
detriment of financial infrastructure of the country.
44
and/or
(d) Issue a direction to the respondents for ensuring corporate
compliances through company secretary in terms of the
provisions of the companies act as existing exemptions in
terms of compliances of the companies act are arbitrary and
would lead to corporate mismanagement.
and/or
(e) Pass such further order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper
under the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONERS AS
IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.
FILED BY:
(PRANAB PRAKASH)
Advocate For Petitioner
DRAWN BY: Shashank Deo Sudhi, Advocate
Drawn on: 17.07.2020
Filed On: 17.07.2020
1
45

WP (PIL) NO._ OF 2020.
IN THE MATTER OF:
SUMAN KUMAR ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNIONOFINDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
I, Suman Kumar , aged about 45 years, S/o Late Sh. Arjun Prasad
Singh, Rio 22/11, Second Floor, Near Patel Park, West Patel
Nagar, New Delhi-110008, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under:-
1. That I am the petitioner and as such I am well conversant with
the facts and circumstances of the present matter from my
personal knowledge and belief and hence am competent to
swear this affidavit.
2. That accompanying Writ Petition under Article 32 of
Constitution of India has been drafted by my counsel on my
instruction and the facts stated therein are true and correct to
the best of my knowledge and belief.
3. That the contents of accompanying Public Interest Litigation
(Para 01 to Para 46 ) (Page 01 to 47 ) and synopsis, list of
dates & events (page B to T ) and prayer of the accompanied
public interest litigation and accompanying interlocutory
applications have been read by me and found true and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief. The contents of the
46
same are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity
and may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit.
4. That the content of above affidavit is true and correct to my
personal knowledge and belief and nothing material has been
concealed there form. c
:2l ---=.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi on this day of 17 July 2020 that the
contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my
knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed
there from.
DEPONENT
47

WP (PIL) NO._ OF 2020.
IN THE MATTER OF:
SUMAN KUMAR ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNIONOFINDIA & ORS. . .. RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
I, Suman Kumar , aged about 45 years, S/o Late Sh. Arjun Prasad
Singh, Rio 22/11, Second Floor, Near Patel Park, West Patel
Nagar, New Delhi-110008, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under:-
1. That I am the petitioner in the present Public Interest
Litigation and am well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the present matter from my personal
knowledge and belief and hence am competent to swear this
affidavit.
2. That I state that there is no personal gain, private motive or
oblique reason in filing the present Public Interest Litigation.
3. That the content of above affidavit is true and correct to my
personal knowledge and belief and nothing material has been
concealed there form
,,
''p-
7" = )
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi on this 17 day of July 2020 that the
contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my
knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed
there from.
�I =
DEPONENT
48
ANNEXURE P-1
THE INSTITUTE OF COMPANY SECRETARIES OF INDIA
In Pursuit of Professional Excellence
8th July, 2019
MCA/PD: 2019
Shri Injeti Srinivas, IAS
Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs
Government of India
Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road
New Delhi 110001
Sir,
Ref: Letter No. 17/33/2019-CL-V dated 17th June,2019, received on
19th June, 2019 With reference to the above captioned letter, the
Institute of Company Secretaries of India (ICSI) respectfully
submits as under:
1. The ICSI welcomes the initiatives of Ministry of Corporate
Affairs (MCA) to weed out inactive companies and
disqualified directors, protect the public money, overcome
the financial irregularities and increase the effectiveness of
the governance mechanism. India is perhaps the only
country where a form like INC-22A (ACTIVE) is
introduced. Clearly, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs
(MCA) is expecting to achieve significantly high level of
governance norms and compliance mechanism. With this
move, MCA has indicated that there is no room for inactive
companies in the Registry of MCA.
2. That, upon receipt of the above mentioned letter dated 17 th
June 2019 from MCA along with representation of
stakeholders, a Special Meeting of the Council of ICSI was
convened on 27th June 2019, to have detailed deliberations
on the matter. Each of the said representations that were
49
annexed to the said letter were deliberated threadbare. The
individual responses to each representation are separately
enclosed herewith and marked as ‘Annexure A’. Further, the
views of the Council of ICSI are submitted in the paragraphs
herein below for your kind consideration. The concerns
raised in the representations primarily relate to various issues
like providing exemption to private companies, small
companies, government companies, sick companies and
dormant companies from filing FORM INC 22A (ACTIVE),
In some of the cases, it is noted that non-appointment of
Company Secretary has been cited as an impediment in
filing the Form INC 22A (ACTIVE).
3. That in all the said letters, there is criticism of various
initiatives of the Government, citing one difficulty or the
other, whereas such initiatives viz. DIR-3 KYC, INC-22A
(ACTIVE), DPT-3, SBO provisions etc. Are focused to
promote governance and transparency in corporate India.
There was a recent drive by the MCA to carry out director’s
KYC and the MCA has taken a firm stand whereby
non-compliant directors were disqualified and
non-compliant companies were struck off from the registry
of MCA, similarly, to make a compliant corporate India,
Company KYC drive by way of Form INC-22A (ACTIVE)
has been initiated bythe MCA, which every company is
required to comply. In case any of the company could not
comply with such initiatives of the government, such
non-compliant Company should get marked as inactive.
4. That, such defiant attitude was witnessed at the time of
launch of MCA 21 e- governance program and also the
history repeated itself when the Companies Act, 2013 was
50
introduced. But the MCA has been constantly strengthening
the compliance and governance framework. It can be
observed that the persons who have made representations are
all approaching with a negative mindset, and pleading
ignorance of law as an excuse.
5. That those companies which are citing paid up capital as an
issue have an option reduction of paid up capital but they
have not chosen to reduce their paid up capital in last 5
years, since introduction of the Companies Act 2013, The
companies having paid up share capital of Rs. 5 Crore or
more, there is a requirement of appointment of a whole-time
Company Secretary , as the very idea of the Government is
to graduate such companies to a compliance driven and a far
more governed platform, so that such companies could be
bench marked vis-a-vis best governed companies, globally.
By doing so, the government seeks to have better corporate
governance standards for such companies.
6. That, these companies have also requested the MCA to drop
all the new forms introduced by MCA in view of ease of
doing business. As you are already aware that the World
Bank has released its latest doing business report (DBR,
2019) on 31st October 2018, wherein India has recorded a
jump of 23 positions against its rank of 100 in 2017 to be
placed now at 77th rank among 190 countries assessed by the
World Bank. This itself proves that the compliances
introduced by the MCA have not been a hurdle in the Ease
of Doing Business but has been an enabler for the same.
That, if we closely look at the parameters on which the
ranking is based, it aims at simplifying the procedure and
time involved in carrying out the compliances, whereas the
51
appointment of Company Secretary is to ensure the
compliances as an “officer in default” and also a “key
Managerial Personnel” under the Companies Act, 2013 and
the rules made there under.
7. That, the MCA has been initiating the ease of doing business
by making events online and reducing the overall time taken
and by making e-forms dynamic to the extent that various
forms have even been categorized in STP mode and now the
stakeholders get approval at the click of the button. But,
despite such initiatives, there has been a tendency by handful
of non-compliant persons to criticize and blame the system.
In the past few years, the MCA has proposed various
amendments in view of Ease of Doing business and kept
only essential requirements which every corporate must
follow.
8. That, one of total active companies, i.e. Approx. 11 lakh
companies, only 39,805 companies are required to appoint a
whole-time Company Secretary. We wish to submit that as
on 1st July 2019, ICSI has 58,690 Company Secretaries on
its register out of which only 10,644 are in practice.
Accordingly, sufficient numbers of Company Secretaries are
available to serve the Corporate India. Further, ICSI through
its dedicated placement placement cell provides placement
services to corporate to meet the demand and supply of the
Company Secretaries across the country.
9. That, in view of the aforesaid, keeping in mind the role of
Company Secretaries in enhancing governance standards
internally within the corporate, we wish to submit that the
present parameters for appointment of company secretary
which are framed by the MCA after a lot of public debate
52
and deliberations are absolutely aligned with the present
requirements; and therefore, to be kept intact. Needless to
mention that the level of compliance as envisaged by the
Government is rising day by day.
We shall be pleased to provide any further information or
clarification in this regards on hearing from your goodself.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(CS Ashok Kumar Dixit)
Officiating Secretary
The Institute of Company Secretaries of India
Sl. No. Name of the Company/ Remarks of the Petitioner

Stakeholders
1. Chartered Accountant A. John No Merit. Chartered Accountant firm-
Morris, Chennai. The issue raised with professional
Letter Dated 09.04.2019. biasness. Copy of the profile collected
from the public domain is enclosed
herewith as ANNEXURE- ____.
2. G V K Power & Infrastructure The company has already company
Ltd. secretary since 01.10.2005 namely Mr.
Letter dated 04.04.2019 Puni Venkata Rama Seshu (PAN-
ACUPP3819Q). Hence the grievances
raised with malicious intents without
being the interested party and is a big
corporate house as it reflects from assets
and charges as per the master data of
MCA. Copy of the same is enclosed
herewith as Annexure No- ____.
3. Blue Berry Agro Products Pvt. As per the master data and information
Ltd. , Mumbai. collected from the website it’s a big
company but violating the express
provision of law since 2014. Relevant
documents are enclosed herewith as
Annexure --___
4. Local Circle - Social Media Grievances pertain to other issues.
Platform for Start Up.
5. A.P. Towers Ltd., Andhra It is a PSU. The issue were raised for no
Pradesh. attracting the company secretaries in view
53
of scales of pay. Hence, not relates to non
availability of company secretaries.
Institute has suggested fresher company
secretaries and also to take the help of the
placement cell of ICSI. Hence, no merit in
the grievances.
Copy of the Master Data and other
information are enclosed herewith as
Annexure -- )
6. Andhra Pradesh State Fiber Net It also a PSU and has raised other issue
Ltd. not connected with company secretaries
and have raised only the point of no able
to attract company secretaries in view of
low pay scales. Institute has suggested
fresher company secretaries and also to
take the help of the placement cell of
ICSI. Hence, no merit in the grievances.
7. Tamilnadu Spinning Mills Have not mentioned the name of any
Association, Dindigul, Chennai. company and have simply asked for
exemption from filing of INC-22A
ACTIVE stating that companies are not
able to find the suitable candidate
possessing the requisite qualification as
company secretaries. ICSI has offered the
services of placement cell if there is nay
such instances. Details of this firm
downloaded from te website is enclosed
herewith as Annexure -- )
8. South India Importers Have not mentioned the name of any
Association, Chennai. company and have simply asked for
exemptions of the private company stating
the reason that most of the private
companies are not able to find the suitable
candidates possessing the requisite
qualifications. However, the ICSI has
clarified the issue and offered the
placement cell services of ICSI for
granting the relief if any such case exists
hence, it was a roving grievances without
any base to evade from the express
provision of law.
9. P. Krishna & Associates, The issues were clarified by the ICSI and
Chartered Accountant , there remains nothing. The issue have
Chennai. been raised with the professional biasness
to support the evading route of the express
provision of law. The exemption was
asked in the name of ease of doing
business. There was no question of non
10. Manjunath, Chartered The issue was clearly addressed by the
Accountant, Chennai. ICSI. Further there was no question of
non availability of the company
54
secretaries.
11. Jainex Aamcol Ltd. It is a listed company fully covered under
the express provision of law. No question
of non availability of company secretaries.
Further the issue was addressed by the
ICSI.
12. Our Investments Enterprise As per the master data, the paid up capital
Ltd., Ernakulum of the company is Rs 20,21,100 and hence
there is no need of appointment of
company secretaries. The issue have been
raised with malicious intents without
being he interested party. Hnece, no merit.
13. Agasthiyar Muni Child Care The issue was raised that the company
Centre, Kanyakumari District, secretaries were not available in the
South India. market who are willing to join the
companies of their size and operations.
Issue was addressed completely by ICSI
and have also offered the help of the
placement cell of ICSI.
14. P.H.D. Chamber of Commerce The issue was pertaining to technical issue
& Industry. of MCA portal and not related to company
secretaries.
15. Kaytee Corporation Pvt. Ltd., The case of the complainant is the clear
Mumbai violation of law and self admission for
working on hiring of company secretaries
only from last few months and it have
been made with clear malicious intents
and seems to be a fit case for legal action
against them for non compliance of law.
Copy of Master data and other
information s are enclosed herewith as
Annexure- )
16. South India Mills Association Without naming the company have made
a roving allegation of non finding the
company secretaries for few companies.
ICSI has offered for immediate placement
services if there is any case as such hence
no merit in the case
TRUE TYPED COPY

55
ANNEXURE P-2
25thJuly, 2019
MCA/PD: 2019

Government of India
New Delhi 110001
Ref: Letter No. 17/33/2019-CL-V dated 8th July,2019, received
on 9th July, 2019
Sir,
We wish to inform that the comments of the Institute of company
Secretaries of India (ICSI) on the matter referred to in MCA
letter dated 17th June, 2019 were submitted on 9th July, 2019. The
copy of the said letter is at Annexure A for your kind reference,
please.
Further, after examination of 18 further more representations, the
comments of the ICSI on those are given at Annexure B.
We, once again, reiterate that the present parameters for
appointment of Company Secretary which are framed by MCA
after a lot of public debate and deliberations are absolutely
aligned with the present requirement; and therefore, need to be

56
kept intact. Needless to mention that the level of compliance as
envisaged by the Government is rising day by day.
We shall be pleased t provide any further information or
clarification in this regard on hearing from your good self.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-

Officiating Secretary)
Sl. No. Name of the Company/ Remarks of the Petitioner

Stakeholders
1. Rosemary Joseph, Director, Issue not relating to appointment of
Sunsea Traders Ltd. Company Secretary.
Letter dated 14.06.2019.
Sunsea Cruise Lines Ltd. Company Secretary.
Sunsea Euro Ventures Ltd. Company Secretary.
Seaways Maritime India Company Secretary.
Ltd.
5. Rosemary Joseph, Director Issue not relating to appointment of
SunSea Travels (India) Ltd. Company Secretary.
Tradehall Markets Ltd. Company Secretary.
7. Aditya Garg Issue not relating to appointment of
(email dated 14.06.2019) Company Secretary.
8. RSC International Ltd. The company has raised the issue of
Letter dated 08.06.2019 non finding of Company Secretaries
57
inspite of their efforts. The ICSI
have clarified that he has never
approached to the placement cell of
ICSI and the information rendered
by him is incorrect and have
clarified the other issues in detail.
The question is whether the
company has complied the said
provisions since 2013-14, 2014-15,
2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18.
Further, the company has already
appointed the CS on 01.07.2019
after this notification of INC-22A
and his allegation that no company
secretary is available does not
sustain and his matter already
resolved.
9. IMC Chambers of The ICSI has already clarified its
Commerce and Industry issues and suggested for fresher
Letter dated 17.06.2019 company secretary. They have also
suggested to add turn over criteria
and it has been also suggested by
the ICSI and being supported and
requested by the petitioner.
10 IMC Chambers of Not pertains to the issue of
Commerce and Industry appointment of company
Letter dated 18.06.2019 secretaries.
11. Narayan Jain, patron Roving statement have been made
Legal Relief Society to increase the limit without any
Email dated 18.06.2019. reason thereof hence does not
sustain. It is also a case of
professional biasness (To check the
background of this society.)
12. Southern India Mills Same letter have been sent twice
Association and have already been clarified by
Letter dated 13.06.2019. the ICSI in its reply dated
08.07.2019.
13. S Sundar Raman He is a practicing Chartered
Email dated 13.06.2019 Accountant and have raised this
objection due to professional
biasness. No merit in the case. ICSI
has already clarified the issue in
detail.
14. Ketan H Deshmukh The issue is not relating to
58
Email dated 18.06.2019 appointment of company secretaries
15. Andhra Pradesh Airports The issue is also not relating to
Development Corporation appointment of company secretaries
Ltd.
Letter dated 14.06.2019
Development Corporation appointment of company secretaries
Ltd.
17. CA K. Gopala Krishna The issue is not relating to
Letter dated 11.06.2019 appointment of company secretaries
18. Liquors India Ltd. This company is violating the law
Letter dated 26.06.2019. since long time and have not
appointed company secretary inspite
of clear provisions of law. When
the Ministry have launched
INC-22A and left no option for
them they have came up with
excuses of non availability if
company secretary.
TRUE TYPED COPY

59
ANNEXURE P-3
MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS
NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 3rd January, 2020
G.S.R. 13(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-section (1) of section 203 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of
2013) read with section 469 of the said Act, the Central
Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend
the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial
Personnel) Rules, 2014, namely:- 1. (1) These rules may be
called the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) Amendment Rules, 2020. (2) They shall
be applicable in respect of financial years commencing on or
after 1st April, 2020. 2. In the Companies (Appointment and
Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 (herein after
referred to as said rules), for rule 8A, the following shall be
substituted as under:- “8A. Every private company which has a
paid up share capital of ten crore rupees or more shall have a
whole-time company secretary.”. 3. In the said rules, in rule 9 of
the said rules, in sub-rule (1), (i) after clause (b), at the end the
word “or” shall be inserted. (ii) after clause (b), the following
clause shall be inserted, namely:- “(c) every company having

60
outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or public financial
institutions of one hundred crore rupees or more.”. (iii) the
following Explanation shall be inserted, namely:- “Explanation :-
For the purposes of this sub-rule, it is hereby clarified that the
paid up share capital, turnover, or outstanding loans or
borrowings as the case may be, existing on the last date of latest
audited financial statement shall be taken into account.”.
[F. No. 01/05/2013-CL-V-Pt-I]

KVR MURTY, Jt. Secy.
Note: The principal rules were published in the Gazette of India
vide notification number G.S.R. 249(E), dated the 31st March,
2014 and lastly amended vide number G.S.R. 875(E), dated the
12th September 2018.
TRUE TYPED COPY

61
ANNEXURE P-4

8th January, 2020

Dear Professional Colleagues,
Subject: Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) AmendmentRules, 2020
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) vide notification dated
3rd January, 2020 has amended theCompanies (Appointment and
Remuneration of ManagerialPersonnel) Rules, 2014, effective
from 1st April 2020, altering the threshold limits for mandatory
appointment of Company Secretaries.
This amendment has increased the threshold limit from Rupees 5
(five) crore to Rupees 10 (ten)crore which has caused
apprehensions in minds of our esteemed members and students.
While, we truly appreciate your concern, we also wish to submit
that such revision of limits have been part and parcel of our
professional journey and such limits have undergone changes
from time to time as under:
Year Threshold Limit
1975 Rs. 25 lakh or more
1988 Rs.50 Lakh or more
2002 Rs. 2 Crore of more
2009 Rs. 5 Crore
2020 Rs. 10 Crore
We submit the following facts for your kind reference:
Date Particulars
25th February, 2019 Notification of e-Form INC-22A
62
(ACTIVE), which was much appreciated
by stakeholders
15th June, 2019 Last Date of filling e-Form INC-22A
Subsequently, large number of
companies were marked as Active Non
Complaint due to non-filling of e-Form
INC-22A and one of the reason was
non-appointment of Company Secretary
17th June, 2019 Letter from MCA forwarding
representations from various
stakeholders expressing difficulties in
filling e-Form INC-22A
22nd June, 2019 Writ petition filed before the Hon’ble
Court of Delhi against existing threshold
limits for mandatory appointment of
Company Secretaries
27th June, 2019 Special Council Meeting convened to
deliberate on above issue
8th July, 2019 Response from ICSI to MCA Letter
requesting status quo on Rule 8A which
was also hosted at ICSI website
8th July, 20169 Letter from MCA forwarding further
representations
10th July, 2019 Decision of the Special Council meeting
hosted at ICSI website
25th July, 2019 ICSI response to MCA Letter which was
simultaneously hosted at ICSI website
and was followed by several meetings
with MCA
30th July, 2019 Issues raised by one Member of
Parliament in Rajya Sabha on mandatory
appointment of Company Secretaries
and response of Hon’ble Minister of
Finance and Corporate Affairs on the
floor of the House being principle
stakeholder, ICSI approached MCA to
understand the rationale for considering
revision in limits under Rule 8A
5th October, 2019 Special Council Meeting followed by
meeting with MCA to brief the decision
of the meeting
63
In view of requirements of filling e-Form INC-22A,
representations against rule 8A and also writ petition in the
Hon’ble High Court (suprisingly by our own members), MCA
started considering the revision in the limit. It was because of
your Institute’s continuous involvement and representations, the
enhancement in limits has been limited to Rs.10 crore only and
not beyond.
We wish to place on record that the Corporates have resposed
faith and confidence on our members because of their skills,
knowledge, capability and for value they create for the
organization and not because of merely statutory requirement.
We believe, that impact of the Amendment Rules may not be
significant as number of ACTIVE non-compliant companies are
still very large in number which provides ample scope for the
employment of company secretaries.
We assure that the ICSI is committed to provide whole- hearted

support to its members and students and will take all necessary
measures as may be required.
We earnestly appeal all our members and students not to post any
derogatory or defamatory remarks against the Regulators,
stakeholders or institute on the social media or by any other
means, keeping in view its far- reaching impact on the credibility
of the profession. We request all our members to kindly maintain
and uphold highest standards of professionalism and conduct
themselves in a manner befitting the profession. As members of
one of the top most professional institutions, it is our prime
responsibility to follow ethics and good governance in our
personal conduct as well.
64
We once again thank all our members for rendering us strength
and assure that the Institute will put in its best of efforts all our
members for rendering us strength and assure that the Institute
will put in its best of efforts in promoting the cause of profession.
Regards
CS Ranjeet Pandey
President
TRUE TYPED COPY

65
ANNEXURE P-5
ICSI/Sec/1/2020
9th January,2020
To,
The Chairmen and Member of the regional Councils, ICSI
The Chairmen and Members of the Managing Committees of the
Chapters, ICSI
The Regional Directors/Executive Officers/I/C Chapters
The Director- CCGRT, Navi MUMBAI, I/C-COE Hyderabad
Subject:- Amendment in the Companies (Appointment and

Remuneration of Managerial Personal), Rules, 2014.
WHEREAS, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA)

Government of India has issued a Notification dated 3rd
January,2020 amending Rule 8A of the Companies
(Appointment and Remuneration of the Managerial Personal),
Rules, 2014.
WHEREAS, in the wake of amendment in the rule 8A, there has

been certain apprehensions in the minds of the minds members
and the stakeholders and concerns have also been raised.
WHEREAS, the ICSI has issued a communication dated 8th

January, 2020 to all the members and student of the ICSI in the
matter, Furthermore, the ICSI is in process of taking up the
matter with the MCA once again to place the concerns and
grievances of the members and stakeholders.
AND THEREFORE, it is advised to refrain from making any

derogatory or defamatory comment against the MCA or the ICSI.
66
FURTHER, You are advised to refrain from facilitating the

demonstrations by the members and the students.
ALSO, the Regional Councils/ Chapters/Units are advised not

make any representation in this regard at their and directly to any
authority/ Forum, as the Institute is already in process of once
again taking up the matter with the MCA.
SD/-
(CS. Ashok Kumar Dixit)
Officiating Secretary, ICSI
TRUE TYPED COPY

67
ANNEXURE P-6
10th January 2020
PD: MCA/Jan

Government of India
New Delhi 110001
Sir,
Managerial Personnel) Amendment Rules 2020
This has reference to Ministry’s Notification dated 3rd January
2020 amending the Companies ( Appointment and Remuneration
of Managerial Personnel) Rules 2014 thereby altering the limits
for mandatory appointment of whole-time Company Secretaries
from rupees 5 (five) crore to rupees 10(ten) crore.
We humbly submit that the amendment has caused apprehension
in the minds of our members and students and there has been lot
of resentment in the fraternity across the country.
Company Secretary is recognized as Compliance Officer under
the Companies Act as well as by other Regulators such as SEBI.
His role includes advising the board on good governance

68
practices and compliance of rules and regulations. He commands
high position in the value chain and acts as conscience keeper of
the company. The Company Secretary is a unique interface
between the board and management and as such acts as an
important link between the board and the business.
The Company Secretary has an important role to play in
organizing and implementation of decisions of Board, its
Committees and the general body meetings mandated under law.
With greater focus on governance, the stakeholders expectations
are increasing and it is this need that has led to rise of the
importance of role of Company Secretary.
In view of the above, it is in the best interest of the corporate
world, to have Whole - time Company Secretary, who protects
and promotes Corporate Governance.
Hence, we humbly request your good office to kindly consider
further amendment in the rule, taking into kind consideration,
following suggestions:
SUGGESTION -1:
Every company which has a paid up share capital of more than
Rs 5 Crores and up to Rs 10 Crores and

69
b. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or public financial
institutions of one hundred crores rupees or more;
Explanation- For the purpose of this sub rule, the paid up share
capital, turnover, or outstanding loans or borrowings as the case
may be, existing on the last date of latest audited financial
statement may be taken into account.
c. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or public financial
institutions of one hundred crores rupees or more.;
Shall have a Whole Time Director.
Explanation:- For the purpose of this sub rule, the paid up share
capital, turnover, or outstanding loans or borrowings as the case
may be, existing on the last date of latest audited financial
Justification for submission

The companies have proper and significant business operations
which triggers compliance with various laws. In absence of
services of Whole-Time Company Secretaries, these active
companies may be exposed to greater regulatory risk and non-
compliance. Further, in such companies, public interest is also
70
involved and following good governance practices becomes more
significant.
We request you to kindly consider the above submissions
favorably and we shall be pleased to provide any further
information or clarification on hearing from MCA.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
Sd/-
(CS Ranjeet Pandey)
President
TRUE COPY
71
ANNEXURE P-7
Dated : 11.01.2020
To,
Mr. Ranjeet Pandey
President ICSI
The Institute of Company Secretary of India
ICSI House, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi - 11000
Request for open house session / presentation on companies

(appointment and remuneration od managerial personal)
amendment rules - 2020, for better presentation before the
ministry (MCA).
Dear sir,
This is with reference to the captioned subject and the Ministry

of Corporate Affairs notification dated 3 rd January 2020 thereby
altering the paid-up capital limits for the appointment of
Company Secretary in companies.
In this regards I would suggest for a full day open house

discussion between council members and members of the ICSI
for soliciting their views, ideas, and inputs for making a better
representation before the ministry (MCA). I would like to make a
detailed presentation in the open house of any difficulties before
the council members which can be helpful. The ICSI may invite
the other senor member for presentation on this subject.
72
Further it should be noted that non filing of Form NIC 22 for
non-availability of our members are meaningless. The INC 22
required various mandatory field including the correct and
certified details of registered offices. Their latitude and
longitudes along with photographs of the concerned responsible
officials. Therefore non filing of INC 22 can be due to various
reasons. It is also non digestible that the MCA have received the
complaint from 16,000 companies that they have put their best
efforts an advertisement but in spite of that no company
Secretaries are available in the market, further in the past more
then 6 Lakhs companies closed / strike off due to continued non
compliances and traceability. Still there are companies with high
paid-up capital but without any whereabout or with fake and
dummy registered offices which can be the reason of non filing
of INC 22 beside others. Hence there are no questions that our
members are not available in the market further there was options
to liberalized the INC 22 if needed but there was no question of
reducing the capital. It seems an action due to the mis
representation of the fact by the beneficial parties of competitive
institution if any. Hence there is need to check the current
situation with facts and figures and open house session will be
good option.
Note only this is was also one of my agenda item in my

manifesto vide point no. 23 ‘’ A separate wing for continued
industrial research, demand and supply of the members to
the industry, understanding the business needs and the
industries expectations. ‘’ also vide point no 24 ‘’ changes as
suggested and solicited from the members.’’
73
We have trained and developed more then 55,000 members for
the industry who are contentiously dealing with various critical
issues of their ground and company and can give better input, not
only on current question but on overall development.
We appreciate for urgent representation by your good self dated

10th of January, 2020. However additional representation can be
made with strong possibilities of value addition.
Please consider do the needful and oblige.
Thanking you,
SD/-
Suman Kumar
M. No. FCS 5824.
Address : 22/11, 2nd Floor, Back Side, Near Patel Park,
West Patel Nagar, New Delhi - 110008.
Mobile No. +91 9958299558
C.C. Secretary to ICSI
TRUE TYPED COPY

74
ANNEXURE P-8

03 February 2020
PD: MCA/Jan 2020/1

Government of India
New Delhi 110001
Sir,
Managerial Personnel) Amendment Rules, 2020 notified on 3 rd
January, 2020
Further to our letter dated 10th January, 2020 on the above
mentioned subject wherein it was submitted that the alteration in
the limits for mandatory appointment of whole time Company
secretaries from rupees 5 (five) crores to rupees 10(ten) crore, it
has caused apprehension for loss of employment in the minds of
our members and students.
We wish to reiterate that a Company Secretary is recognized as
Compliance Officer under the Companies Act as well as by other
Regulators such as Securities Exchange Board of India. His role
includes advising the board on good governance practices and
compliance of rules and regulations. He commands high position
in the value chain and acts as conscience keeper of the company.
The Company Secretary is a unique interface between the board
and management and as such acts as an important link between
the board and the stake holders.
75
The Company Secretary has an important role to play in
organizing and implementation of decisions of Board, its
Committees and the general body meetings mandated under law.
With greater focus on governance, the stakeholders expectations
are increasing and it is this need that has led to rise of the
importance of role of Company Secretary.
In view of the above, it is in the best interest of the corporate

world, to have Whole - time Company Secretary, who protects
and promotes Corporate Governance.
Hence, we humbly request your good office to kindly consider

further amendment in the rule 8A of the Companies
Amendment Rules 2013, taking into consideration inserting the
following in place of the existing provision.
A. a paid-up share capital of ten crore rupees or more; or
B. net worth of one hundred crore rupees or more; or
C. outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or public
financial institutions of one hundred crore rupees or more;
or
D. turnover of two hundred fifty crore rupees or more
shall have a Whole time Company Secretary.
Explanation- For the purpose of this sub rule, the paid up share
capital, networth, outstanding loans or borrowings or turnover, as
the case may be, existing on the last date of latest audited
Every company which ceases to be a company covered under
Rule 8A for three consecutive financial years shall not be
76
required to appoint Company Secretary till such time it meets the
criteria specified in Rule 8A”
Justification for submission
The Companies have proper and significant business operations
which triggers compliance with various laws. In absence of
service of whole time Company Secretaries, these active
companies may be exposed to greater regulatory risk and
non-compliances. Further, in such companies, public interest is
also allowed involved and following good governance practices
becomes more significant.
We request you to kindly consider the above submissions
favorably. We shall be pleased to provide any further information
or clarification on hearing from your good self.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Officiating Secretary
TRUE TYPED COPY

77
ANNEXURE-P-9
FORM NO. DIR-12

[Pursuant to sections 7(1) (c), 168 & 170 (2) of The
Particulars of appointment of directors and
the key managerial personnel
changes among them
andthe
Companies Act, 2013 and rule 17 of the Companies

(Incorporation) Rules 2014 and 8, 15 & 18 of the
Companies (Appointment and Qualification of
Directors) Rules, 2014]
Form Language English Hindi
Refer the instruction kit for filing the form.
1. *This form is for New company existing company
2. (a) * Corporate Identity Number (CIN) ofcompany U17120MH1994PTC079375
(b) Global location number (GLN) of company Pre-fill
3. (a) Name of the company KAYTEE CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED
(b) Address of the 51, FLOOR-5, PLOT-230, SAKHAR BHAVAN

RAMNATH GOYANKA MARG, NARIMAN POINT
registered office
MUMBAI
of the company
Mumbai City
Maharashtra
400021
(c) E-mail ID of the company [email protected]
4. Number of Managing director or director(s) for which the form is being filed
5. Details of the Managing Director, directors of the company

78
1 Details of the Managing Director or Director of the company
i Director Identification Number(DIN) Pre-fill

ii Name
iii Father's name
iv Present residential address
v Nationality vi Date of birth vii Gender
viii i Appointment Cessation Change indesignation

x Date of Appointment or
x Designation change in designation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
xi Category
xii Whether Chairman, Executive Director, Non-Executive Director
Chairman Executive director Non Executive Director
xiii DIN of such director to whom appointee is alternate Pre-fill

xiv Name of the director to whom such
appointee is alternate
xv Name of the company or institution whose nominee the

appointee is
xvi E-mail ID of director

xvii In case of cessation
Hereby confirmed that the above mentioned Director Managingdirector xviii is not associated with the company
with effect from (DD/MM/YYYY) xix due to
xx Interest in other entities
xxi Number of such entities
xxii * CIN/LLPIN/FCRN/Registrationnumber Pre-fill
xxiii *Name
xxiv *Address
xxv Nature of interest

xxvi *Designation
xxvii x Percentage of Shareholding xxviii Amount
xix Others (specify)

79
6. Number of manager(s), secretary(s), Chief Financial Officer or Chief Executive Officer for which the form is
being filed 1
7. Details of manager(s), secretary(s), Chief Financial Officer or Chief Executive Officer of the company
1 i Director Identification Number (DIN), if any 03547507 Pre-fill

ii Income Tax permanent account number (PAN) ABVPB2623E Verify Details
iii Appointment Cessation
iv Membership number of the secretary 9113
v First Name SHYAM

vi Middle
BALKRISHNA
Namevii
BHATTBHATT
LastName
viii Father's
ix name
First Name BALKRISHNA
x Middle Name SHRIRAM
xi Last Name BHATTBHATT
301, Green Valley CHS, Plot No - 26,

xii Present residential address xiii LineI
xiv Line II Sector- 19, Nerul East, Agarwal Corner

Mumbai
xv City
Maharashtra xvii Pin Code 400706
xvi State
xviii ISO Country Code IN

xix Country
INDIA
xx Phone xxi Fax
9819056299
01/01/1967 (DD/MM/YYYY)
xxii Date of birth
Secretary
xxiii Designation
xxiv Date of Appointment or cessation 01/02/2020 (DD/MM/YYYY)
xxv E-mail ID [email protected]
Attachments
List of attachments
80
Attach Resignation Letter Resolution ShyamKayte
(1) Declaration by first director
(2) Declaration of the appointee director Attach
in Form No. DIR-2;
(3) Notice of resignation; Attach
(4) Evidence of cessation; Attach
(6) Optional attachment(s) - if any. Attach

Remove attachment
Declaration
I * PREMAL HARKISHON UDANI

81
A person named in the articles as a

(in case if a new company) or
authorized by the Board of Directors of the Company vide number
2 dated
of the company 07/02/2020

to sign this form and declare that all the requirements of Companies Act, 2013 and the rules made thereunder in
respect of the subject matter of this form and matters incidental thereto have been complied with. I also declare
that all the information given herein above is true, correct and complete including the attachments to this form and
nothing material has been suppressed.
PREMAL Digitally signed by
* To be digitally signed by PREMAL HARKISHON

HARKISHON UDANI
Date: 2020.02.12
UDANI 12:27:48+05'30'
* Designation Director
* Director identification number of the director; or DIN or PAN of the 00075391

manager or CEO or CFO; or Membership number of thesecretary
Certificate by practicing professional
I declare that I have been duly engaged for the purpose of certification of this form.
It is hereby certified that I have gone through the provisions of the Companies Act,
2013 and Rules thereunder for the subject matter of this form and matters incidental
thereto and I have verified the above particulars (including attachment(s)) from the
original/certified records maintained by the Company/applicant which is subject
matter of this form and found them to be true, correct and complete and no
information material to this form has been suppressed. I further certify that :
The said records have been properly prepared, signed by the required officers of
the Company and maintained as per the relevant provisions of the Companies
Act, 2013 and were found to be in order ;
All the required attachments have been completely and legibly attached to this
form;
It is understood that I shall be liable for action under Section 448 of The
Companies Act, 2013 for wrong certification, if any found at any stage.
Di g it al ly s i g ne d by SANDEEP I GANDHI
* To be digitally signed by SANDEEP DN: c=IN, o=Pers o na l , CID - 6 53 1 25 1,

2.5.4. 20= 00 be a 66 19 9 25 9 eb 8f0 3c 2b 43 e 03c 2
IGANDHI 31 56 3 61 5 e6 dd 3 54 b5 6 23 7a 0 45 a 4e 97 c2 9d 2
p ostn=SA
1 41,c al C oN
d e= 40 0 0 6 9, st=
DEEPIGAND HI Ma h ar a sht ra,
seri al N um ber= 4a 2c b3 9 d4 07 4 da 5 0fc8 b1 6 00
d2c bffd b2 3 0c6 6 73 afb 9d a 82 d7 2f5 9 82 e8 b d4
D at e: 2 0 2 0.0 2. 1 2 1 3: 2 2: 30 + 0 5' 3 0'
Chartered accountant (in whole-time practice) or Cost accountant (in whole-time practice) or
Company secretary (in whole-time practice)
* Whether Associate or fellow Associate
FellowMembership number 6721
Certificate of Practice Number 4481
Modify Check Form Prescrutiny Submit

82
This eForm has been taken on file maintained by the Registrar of companies through electronic mode and on the
basis of statement of correctness given by the filing company.
Digitally sign ed b y DSMinist ry o f Cor por ate
DS Ministryof
Affairs 2 3
DN: c=IN, postalCode=400002, st=Ma har asht ra,
street =M arin e
Drive,Bha gvan das Todi Mar g,M arin eLines ,Mu m
Corporate bai, 2. 5.4. 51= 100 - Ever est, ou= Minist ry of

Corpo rat e Affairs , o =Minist ry o f Cor por ate
Affairs 2 3, cn =DS Minis try of Co rpo rate Affairs
23
Affairs 23 Reason :Iatt esttot hea ccur acyan dinte grity of
thisdoc ume nt
Date: 2 020 .02. 12 1 3:2 5:21 +0 5'30'
TRUE COPY
83
ANNEXURE P-10
The Relevant Extracts of Annual Report 2018-2019 of
CHAPTER – III
Registration and Closure of Companies
3.1.1 The number of companies registered under various

Companies Act in India has increased steadily over the years.
While 896 companies were registered during the year 1956-57,
this number increased to 1,23,938 companies during the Year
2018-19. This Chapter reviews registration as well as closure of
companies and number of active companies under various
categories in terms of their ownership and main business
activities etc. Summary Statistics of Indian Companies as on 31 st
March, 2019
3.1.2 The total number of companies registered in the country as

on 31st March, 2019 was 18,73,044. Of these, 6,70,018
companies were closed; 1,615 companies were assigned dormant
status as per the Companies Act, 2013 (Section 455), 6,327
companies are inactive3; 38,610 companies were under the
process of closure; 100 companies were in the process of being
re-activated. Taking the above into account, there were 11,56,374
active companies as on 31st March, 2019. Table 3.1 below
provides a statistical summary of number of companies.
Table 3.1
Summary Statistics of Indian Companies as on 31 st March, 2019
S. Description No. of
No. Companies
84
1 Total Companies Registered 1,873,044
2 Companies closed 670,018
3 Dormant u/ s 455 of 1,615
Companies Act, 2013
4 Inactive u/ s 455 of 6,327
Companies Act, 2013
5 Companies under process for 38,610
closure
6 Active In-Progress (Inactive 100
companies under 21-day
window for completion of
pending filing)
7 Active Companies (1-2-3-4- 1,156,374
5-6)
Chart 3.1 reveals that out of total 18,73,044 companies registered

in India, more than one lakh companies were registered in states
such as Maharashtra (3,70,986), followed by Delhi (3,33,733),
West Bengal (2,01,792),
Tamil Nadu (1,42,765), Kamataka (1,15,926), Telangana

(1,05,072), Uttar Pradesh (1,04,966) and Gujarat (1,00,191) as on
31st March, 2019.
TRUE TYPED COPY

85
ANNEXURE P-11
Registrar by company regarding the number of layers of

subsidiaries) and CODS 2018 in Feb-Mar '2018.
v. eKYC drive for directors of all companies: MCA has
introduced a mandatory eform viz. DIR-3 KYC for all DIN
holders who have been allotted DIN on or before 31st March,
2018 and whose DIN is in approved status. This drive is aimed at
verification of individual DIN holders and weed out non-existent/
dummy DIN holders and ultimately to clean up the Directors' e-
Registry. The KYC process is obtaining additional details such as
AADHAAR, Passport, personal Mobile Number and personal E-
mail ID. Further, for stakeholders who do not possess
AADHAAR , an exception management is provided. There are
around 33 Lakh DINs in the registry and around 15.88 Lakh DIN
holders have filed DIR KYC as on 30th November, 2018. In this
drive, MCA managed to feed 11 lakh Aadhar card holders. This
is one of its kinds of drive carried out anywhere in India.
vi. Integrated form for LLP (FiLLiP) incorporation:

Introduction of a new integrated Form christened FiLLiP (Form
for incorporation of Limited Liability Partnership) replacing the
erstwhile Form 2 (Incorporation document and subscriber's
statement) combining therein 3 services of name reservation,
allotment of Designated Partner Identification Number
(DPIN/DIN) & incorporation of the LLP.
86
8.5.2 Process Re-engineering of LLP Incorporation Related
Form Changes at a glance is as follows:-
S. Existing eForm Neweform Change To be

No. Proposed processed by
1 Form LLP-RUN Web Service Central
l(Application for (Reserve RUN will Registration
reservation or Unique Name) replace Form 1 Centre
change of name) Web Service (CRC) under
Non-STP
2 Form FiLLiP (Form I. FiLLiP will be Central
2(Incorporation for an integrated Registration
document and incorporating form offering Centre
Subscriber's LLP) multiple services (CRC) under
statement) viz. allotment of Non-STP
DIN/Reservation
of Name and
Incorporation of
LLPs.
IL Consequent
upon
notification of
FiLLiP, existing
Form 2 will be
deprecated.
3 Addendum to Addendum to I. RUN- Central
Form 2 FiLLiP(Details LLP SRN to be Registration
(Details in respect in respect of substituted for Centre
of designated designated Form 1 SRN in (CRC) under
partners and partners and relevant field Non-STP
partners of partners of II. PAN is
Limited Liability Limited allowed to be
Partnership) Liability entered in DSC
Partnership) section
TRUE TYPED COPY

87
ANNEXURE-P-12
BSE DB - List of Companies referred to as Vanishing
Companies as on March 31, 2019
Sr. Name of the Company Exchange
1 C F TECHNOLOGIES LTD BgSE
2 ESSEMM INFORMATION SYSTEMS LTD BgSE
3 KRISN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES LTD BgSE
4 SCARLET FLOWERS & AGRITECH LTD BgSE
5 THUNGABADRA PULPS & BOARDS MILLS LTD BgSE
6 UNION HOME PRODUCTS LTD BgSE
7 ASSAM ISPAT LTD Gauhati SE
8 ELLENBARRIE STEELS LTD Gauhati SE
9 ELLENBARRIE CONSTRUCTIONS LTD Gauhati SE
10 HIM CONTAINERS LTD Gauhati SE
11 JASMINE LTD Gauhati SE
12 KAVERI INDIA LTD Gauhati SE
13 PRAGATI IMPEX LTD Gauhati SE
14 SAGAR INDUTRIES LTD Gauhati SE
15 SANGRAIL COMMERCIAL LTD Gauhati SE
16 SUPER IMPEX LTD Gauhati SE
17 ZENITH ENTERPRISES LTD. Gauhati SE
18 ABHYUDYA TRADING LIMITED Gauhati SE
19 ASSOCIATED ENTRADE LTD Gauhati SE
20 ARIHANT FINVEST LTD. Gauhati SE
21 BOSCON INDIA LTD Gauhati SE
22 SKY SCRAPER APARTMENTS LTD Gauhati SE
23 DIRC INVESTMENTS LTD Gauhati SE
24 ESSAR ENTRADE LTD Gauhati SE
25 FAIRWELL FINANCE LTD Gauhati SE
26 KAMAL OVERSEAS LIMITED Gauhati SE
27 NEELAM COMMERCIAL COMPANY LTD Gauhati SE
28 NECEM CEMENTS LTD Gauhati SE
29 PARAMOUNT COMMERCIAL LTD Gauhati SE
30 PURBANCHAL STEEL LTD Gauhati SE
31 PURBANCHAL TRADE AND INDUSTRIES LTD Gauhati SE
32 VENKATESHWAR VANIJYA INDIA LTD Gauhati SE
33 VICTORIA TRADE AND FINANCE LTD Gauhati SE
34 YACHT TRADE AND FINANCE LTD. Gauhati SE
35 ASSAM IMPORT AGENCY LTD Gauhati SE
36 ASSAM OSHZAN LTD Gauhati SE
37 B.G INDUSTRIES LTD Gauhati SE
38 CHARIOT AUTO ACCESSORIES LTD Gauhati SE
39 BDBS ASSOCIATES LTD Gauhati SE
40 CHITRAKOOT FINANCE LTD Gauhati SE
41 CURRENT ELECTRONICS LTD Gauhati SE
42 DIMURTI FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD Gauhati SE
43 DRUZHBA ENGINEERING INDIA LTD Gauhati SE
44 INDRAPRASTHA HOLDINGS LTD Gauhati SE
88
45 ISPAT SHEETS LTD Gauhati SE
46 MACNEILL LEASING & FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD Gauhati SE
47 NEW MILLENNIUM HEALTH CARE PROUDUCTS & Gauhati SE
EQUIPMENTS LTD
48 MOVIE (INDIA) LTD Gauhati SE
49 NEW CENTURY FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. Gauhati SE
50 NORTH EASTERN INDIA EXPORTERS & Gauhati SE
IMPORTERS LTD
51 NOVELTY TRADERS LTD Gauhati SE
52 TECHNO PULP & PAPER BOARD PRODUCTS LTD Gauhati SE
53 PURVANCHAL BUSINESS PROMOTIONS LTD Gauhati SE
54 PURBANCHAL FINANCE LTD Gauhati SE
55 SRG CUSTODIANS & SECURITIES (INDIA) LTD Gauhati SE
56 SUNLIGHT REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPERS LTD. Gauhati SE
57 VIVEK FERTILIZERS LTD Gauhati SE
58 EASTERN MINING & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD Gauhati SE
59 S.B. OVERSEAS LTD Gauhati SE
60 SANKARDEV COKE PRODUCTS LTD Gauhati SE
61 SUN BIOTECHNOLOGY LTD. Gauhati SE
62 GOLDLINE ENTERPRISES LIMITED OTC
63 MAGNUM POLYMERS INDIA LIMITED OTC
64 RAGAVENDRA SPINNERS LIMITED OTC
65 S. B. INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Gauhati SE
66 AASHI IND. LTD. Vadodara SE
67 ADVANCE BIO-COAL (INDIA)LTD. Vadodara SE
68 AESCULAPIUS REMEDIES LTD. Vadodara SE
69 AIR COMMAND AIRTECH Ltd. Vadodara SE
70 AIRCOMMAND INDIA LTD. Vadodara SE
71 ALMAK STEELS LTD. Vadodara SE
72 ALPS BPO SERVICES LTD.(ALPS INFOYS LTD. ) Vadodara SE
73 AMARSHIV OPTICALS LTD. Vadodara SE
74 AMIGANGA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. Vadodara SE
75 ANAGRAM FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
76 ANAND DAIRY LTD. Vadodara SE
77 ANICHEM INDIA LTD. Vadodara SE
78 ANKUJ ZINC OX-LTD. Vadodara SE
79 APPLE MUTUAL FUND Vadodara SE
80 ARCHON ENGINEERING CO. LTD. Vadodara SE
81 ARROW MACCO (INDIA )LTD. Vadodara SE
82 ARVIN LIQUID GASES LTD. Vadodara SE
83 ASIAN INDEPENDENT NETWORK LTD. Vadodara SE
84 BARODA AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. Vadodara SE
85 BARODA ALLOYS & CASTING LTD. Vadodara SE
86 BARODA CARBONS LTD. Vadodara SE
87 BARODA DYING LTD. Vadodara SE
88 BARODA FERROW ALLOYS AND IND. LTD. Vadodara SE
89 BENZO PETROCHEMICAL LTD. Vadodara SE
90 BHARAT FORGE AND PIPES LTD. Vadodara SE
91 CAMEX INTERMIDIATES LTD. Vadodara SE
89
92 CHOKSI ANALYTICAL SERVICES LTD. Vadodara SE
93 CONTINENTAL FORGING LTD. Vadodara SE
94 CROWN LEASING & FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
95 CROWN TRADERS LTD. Vadodara SE
96 D R SOFTECH & IND. LTD. Vadodara SE
97 DADA CHEMICALS LTD Vadodara SE
98 DINESH ALLORGA LTD. Vadodara SE
99 DO-MAX STEEL LTD. Vadodara SE
100 ELVIS INDIA LTD. Vadodara SE
101 GOKUL AGRO IND.LTD. Vadodara SE
102 GOODEARTH INDUSTRIES LTD. Vadodara SE
103 GOODEARTH ORGANICS (INDIA) LTD. Vadodara SE
104 GUJARAT APPARELS LTD. Vadodara SE
105 GUJARAT BONANZA AUTO STEEL LTD. Vadodara SE
106 GUJARAT CONCAST LTD. Vadodara SE
107 GUJARAT INDO LUBE LTD Vadodara SE
108 GUJARAT RODREL ENGG. PRODUCTS LTD. Vadodara SE
109 HARIHAR CHEM LTD. Vadodara SE
110 HAVMORE FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. Vadodara SE
111 HINDUSTAN NITROPRODUCTS GUJARAT LTD. Vadodara SE
112 INDO AMERICAN CREDIT CORP. LTD. Vadodara SE
113 INTEGRA INDIA GROUP COMPANY LTD. Vadodara SE
114 JAYANT SECURITIES AND FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
115 KANORIA DYECHEM LTD. Vadodara SE
116 KARTIKEYA AGRO PRODUCTS LTD. Vadodara SE
117 KRUNAL CONSTRUCTION & FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
118 LMP GUJARAT AGRO EXPORTS LTD. Vadodara SE
119 LYONS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. Vadodara SE
120 MANAV YARN PRODUCTS LTD. Vadodara SE
121 MANISH ORGANICS INDIA LTD. Vadodara SE
122 MARG TECHNO PROJECTS LTD. Vadodara SE
123 MEHAR SHREE LEASING & FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
124 METABOND IND.LTD. Vadodara SE
125 NALSAROVAR RESORTS LTD. Vadodara SE
126 NATURAL EXPOAGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. Vadodara SE
127 NATURO PEST LTD. Vadodara SE
128 NAVAKARRAI SPINNERS LTD. Vadodara SE
129 NEON RESINS & IND. LTD. (BINACA SYNTI) Vadodara SE
130 NEWTON ENGINEERING AND CHEMICALS LTD. Vadodara SE
131 NOSLAR (INDIA)LTD. Vadodara SE
132 PACMAN COMPUTERS SYSTEMS LTD. Vadodara SE
133 PAN INDIA DRUGS AND CHEMICALS LTD Vadodara SE
134 PARAMANI REPLAST LTD. Vadodara SE
135 PARASHAR DEVELOPMENT LTD. Vadodara SE
136 PROFITCORE PIPES LTD. Vadodara SE
137 PROTECH CIRCUIT BREAKERS LTD. Vadodara SE
138 PROTECH SWITCHEARS LTD. Vadodara SE
90
139 PUNJAB LEASE FINANCING LTD Vadodara SE
140 RACHANA CAPITAL & SECURITIES LTD. Vadodara SE
141 RAINBOW HSG. DEVELOPMENT CORPN.LTD. Vadodara SE
142 RAMSUNAR ROLESTEEL LTD. Vadodara SE
143 RAVAL FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
144 RAVI CEMENT LTD. Vadodara SE
145 RAVLON PEN CO. LTD. Vadodara SE
146 READY FOODS LTD. Vadodara SE
147 ROLEX PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. Vadodara SE
148 ROYAL FINANCE LTD Vadodara SE
149 ROYAL RESORTS & HOTELS LTD. Vadodara SE
150 S K LEA FINVEST LTD. Vadodara SE
151 SAGAR APPARELS LTD. Vadodara SE
152 SANDEEP IND.LTD. Vadodara SE
153 SARIGAM STEELS LTD. Vadodara SE
154 SAURASHTRA CALCINE BAUXITE &ALLIED IND. Vadodara SE
155 SAVIN ELECTRONICS LTD. Vadodara SE
156 SHREE VIJAY INDUSTRIES LTD. Vadodara SE
157 SHREYANS LEASING & FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
158 SHRI I JEE CEMENTS LTD. Vadodara SE
159 SHUKRA DIAMOND (EXPORTS)LTD. Vadodara SE
160 SIMANDHAR FINANCE LTD. Vadodara SE
161 SRI KRISHNA DRUGS LTD. Vadodara SE
162 SUDEV CHEMICALS LTD. Vadodara SE
163 SUPERSTAR WELDING IND LTD. Vadodara SE
164 SUSHIL PACKAGINGS (INDIA)LTD. Vadodara SE
165 SWARSHILP PROPERTIES LTD. Vadodara SE
166 TAPURIAH STEELS LTD. Vadodara SE
167 TELNET INFOWAY LTD Vadodara SE
168 TIRUPATI SHELTERS LTD. Vadodara SE
169 TOPLINE SHOES LTD. Vadodara SE
170 TOSHVIN IND.LTD. Vadodara SE
171 UNITY STEEL LTD. Vadodara SE
172 VINAY CHEM PHARMA LTD. Vadodara SE
173 WESTERN ORISSA SUGAR LTD. Vadodara SE
174 YOGIWARE FABRICS LTD. Vadodara SE
175 ZEL JEWELLERS LTD. Vadodara SE
176 ZEN SHAVING LTD. Vadodara SE
177 ZILLON MEDICARE (EXPORT) LTD. Vadodara SE
TRUE TYPED COPY

91
ANNEXURE P-13
LIVE MINT
12.06.2019
Bank frauds worth ₹2.05 trillion happened in last 11 years,
reveals RBI data
 Over 50,000 frauds had hit banks in India FY09-FY19,

RBI said in a response to an RTI query
 ICICI Bank reported the highest number of frauds (6,811)
involving ₹5,033 crore
Topics
Bank Fraud
New Delhi: Of over 50,000 frauds that hit banks in India in the
last 11 fiscal years, the ICICI Bank, State Bank of India (SBI)
and HDFC Bank reported highest number of cases, according to
an RBI data.
Of the total 53,334 cases of frauds reported during 2008-09 and
2018-19 fiscal years, involving a whopping ₹2.05 lakh crore, a
highest of 6,811 were reported by the ICICI Bank
involving ₹5,033.81 crore.
The state-run State Bank of India (SBI) reported 6,793 fraud
cases involving ₹23,734.74 crore followed by HDFC Banks
which recorded 2,497 such cases involving ₹1,200.79 crore,
according to the data given by the central bank in response to an
RTI query filed by this correspondent.
The Bank of Baroda reported 2,160 fraud cases
(involving ₹12,962.96 crore), Punjab National Bank 2,047 frauds
92
( ₹28,700.74 crore) and Axis Bank had 1,944 fraud cases
involving RS 5,301.69 crore public money.
As many as 1,872 frauds involving ₹12,358.2 crore was reported

by Bank of India, 1,783 by Syndicate Bank ( ₹5830.85 crore) and
Central Bank of India’s 1, 613 cases involving ₹9041.98 crore,
the data shows.
IDBI Bank Ltd reported 1,264 fraud cases involving ₹5978.96
crore, Standard Chartered Bank 1,263 cases involving ₹1221.41
crore, Canara Bank 1,254 cases of ₹5553.38 crore, Union Bank
of India 1,244 frauds of ₹11,830.74 crore and Kotak Mahindra
1,213 cases involving ₹430.46 crore.
In that period, Indian Overseas Bank reported 1,115 frauds
involving ₹12,644.7 crore, while Oriental Bank of Commerce
1040 cases of ₹5,598.23 crore.
The United Bank of India reported 944 cases of frauds
involving ₹3052.34 crore, State Bank of Mysore 395 cases
of ₹742.31 crore, State Bank of Patiala 386 cases ( ₹1178.77
crore), Punjab and Sind Bank 276 cases ( ₹1154.89 crore), UCO
Bank 1081 frauds ( ₹7104.77 crore), Tamilnad Mercantile Bank
Ltd 261 cases ( ₹493.92 crore) and Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd
reported 259 frauds ( ₹862.64 crore).Some of the foreign banks
operating in India also reported fraud cases worth crores during
the last 11 fiscal years.
American Express Banking Corporation reported 1,862 fraud
cases of ₹86.21 crore, Citi Bank 1,764 cases of ₹578.09 crore,
Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) Ltd 1,173
frauds of ₹312.1 crore and The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc
reported 216 frauds involving ₹12.69 crore, the RBI data said.
93
A total of 274 cases of frauds were reported by the State Bank of
Travancore involving ₹694.61 crore, Jammu and Kashmir Bank
Ltd reported 142 such cases of ₹1639.9 crore, The Industrial
Finance Corp of India had nine cases of ₹671.66 crore, The
Dhanlakshmi Bank Ltd 89 cases of ₹410.93 crore and Vijaya
Bank reported 639 cases involving ₹1,748.9 crore, it said.
Yes Bank Ltd reported 102 fraud cases involving ₹311.96 crore
and Paytm Payments Bank Limited reported two cases of ₹0.02
crore (or ₹2 lakh), it said.
PTI had on June 3 reported that as many as 6,801 cases of fraud
were reported by scheduled commercial banks and select
financial institutions involving an amount of ₹71,542.93 crore in
the last fiscal, quoting data from the RBI.
After the story was published, the Congress party held a press
conference the next day and demanded that the BJP government
issue a "White Paper" on rising bank frauds in the country.
During 2008-09, a total of 4,372 cases were reported involving
an amount of ₹1,860.09 crore. In 2009-10, ₹1,998.94 crore worth
fraud was reported in 4,669 cases.
A total of 4,534 and 4,093 such cases were reported in 2010-11
and 2011-12 involving ₹3,815.76 crore and ₹4,501.15 crore,
respectively.
In the 2012-13 fiscal, 4,235 fraud cases involving ₹8,590.86
crore were reported by banks as against 4,306 cases
(involving ₹10,170.81 crore) in 2013-14 and 4,639 cases
(involving ₹19,455.07 crore) in 2014-15.
As many as 4,693 and 5,076 cases of fraud were reported in
2015-16 and 2016-17 involving ₹18,698.82 crore and ₹23,933.85
crore, respectively, it said.
94
A total of 5,916 such cases were reported by banks in 2017-18
involving ₹41,167.03 crore.
This story has been published from a wire agency feed without
modifications to the text. Only the headline has been changed.
https://www.livemint.com/industry/banking/bank-frauds-worth-
rs-2-05-trillion-happened-in-last-11-years-reveals-rbi-data-
1560335835680.html
TRUE TYPED COPY

95
ANNEXURE P-14
The Economic Times
30.08.2019
Rs 71,500 crore worth of bank frauds detected in FY19: RBI

report.
Indian banking system detected Rs 71,500 crore worth of frauds
in financial year 2018-19 which to put in scale is slightly more
than the Rs 71,000 crore recapitalisation package planned by the
government to revive the health of its public-sector banks.
Interestingly, over 90 percent of these losses were to the
government owned banks while the share of incidents that
emanated from these lenders was at 55.4 percent.
Overall, 3,766 incidents of frauds were detected in FY19, a 15
percent spike from a year ago, while the losses incurred saw an
80 percent rise from the last year, even as FY18 saw the most
infamous banking fraud in India’s history where Nirav Modi
siphoned off nearly Rs 13,000 crores from Punjab National Bank
in February 2018.
“In terms of area of operations, frauds related to advances

constituted the preponderant share of the total amount involved
in frauds in 2018-19, while the share of frauds in off-balance
sheet items declined from a year ago,” according to RBI’s annual
report released on Thursday. “Frauds relating to card/internet and
deposits constituted only 0.3 per cent of the total value of frauds
in 2018-19.”
96
Most of these frauds were because cheating and forgery,
followed by misappropriation & criminal breach of trust, RBI
said. Small frauds less than Rs.1 lakh were just 0.1 percent of the
amounts involved.
Another point of concern for regulators and policymakers came

from the fact that it took banks an average of nearly 2 years to
detect frauds. Large frauds above Rs.100 crore took banks nearly
four and a half years to detect, RBI said. Nearly Rs 52,000 crore
worth of frauds detected were classified as big frauds.
To curb this menace, the central bank said that it is in talks with
various agencies including the Ministry of Corporate Affairs to
create an interlinked database for fraud monitoring. In
furtherance, the regulators said that analytic engines of banks and
user interface of fraud registry would be improved to create a
more robust monitoringsystem.
The RBI, in the report, said that they also subjected 57 banks
through IT examination to check their cyber security
preparedness and compliances.
“Targeted thematic examinations were also carried out, focusing
on applications, infrastructure and systems used by the banks.”
Article link:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/finance/ba
nk-fraud-touches-rs-71543-crore-in-2018-19-rbi-annual-
report/articleshow/70895326.cms
TRUE TYPED COPY

97
ANNEXURE P- 15
(iv) in the public interest, then it may appoint one or more
persons as Inspectors for carrying out investigation under Section
210. Usually, Inspectors appointed by Central Government under
Section 210 for carrying out the investigation are drawn from
amongst the officers posted in the Offices of Regional Directors
( except when assigned to SFIO).
Serious Fraud Investigation Office.
6.5.1 The SFIO may be asked to investigate under Section 210 of
the Act, incases characterized by: (i) Complexity, and having
inter-departmental and multi-displinary ramifications;
(ii) Substantial involvement of public interest to be judged by
size, either in terms of monetary misappropriation, or in terms of
the persons affected; and
(iii) Possibility of investigations leading to, or contributing
towards, a clear improvement in systems, laws or procedures.
6.5.2 During the financial year from 1st April, 2018 to 31stMarch,
2019, the SFIO has submitted the 12 investigation report to MCA
involving 83 companies. A total number of 37 prosecutions cases
filed in various designated courts related to Company Law /IPC,
NCLT and ICAI/ICSI.
6.5.3 The Central Government ordered investigation into the
affairs of 122 of Companies and LLPs during the year 2018-19
through RoC/RDs Offices and Inspection reports are 57 in
numbers. The Inspection Reports in case of 138 Companies
/LLPs were under progress as on 31st March, 2019.
Prosecutions
98
6.6.1 On the basis of investigation reports (by SFIO and the
Regional Directors), the Ministry takes action in suitable cases.
The action takes the form of prosecutions filed under the Indian
Penal Code, cases filed before the Company Law Board (now
NCLT) and disciplinary proceedings by the Institute of Charted
Accountants of India. As per Section 439 of the Act, the court
will take cognizance of the offence only upon a complaint by
either (i) Registrars of Companies, or (ii) any shareholder of the
company, or (iii) a person authorized by the Central Government,
or (iv) Securities and Exchange Board of India, in respect of
listed companies relating to issue and transfer of securities and
non-payment of dividend.
6.6.2. As on 1st April, 2018, 44,278 cases of prosecution were
pending in various courts which were launched under the Act,
2013 and Companies Act, 1956. During the financial year 2018-
19, 2,573 new cases of prosecution were launched.
6.6.3 As on 31st March, 2019, 33,965 prosecutions were pending
in various courts. ROC-wise summary of prosecutions and their
disposal are given in the Statement-XI (Appendix).
6.6.4 The details of nature of defaults and the number of cases of
prosecution launched in 2018-19 under the Companies Act, 1956
and the Companies Act, 2013 respectively are given in Table
6.3(A) and Table 6.3(B) below:
TRUE TYPED COPY

99
ANNEXURE-P-16
THE RELEVANT EXTRACTS OF ANNUAL REPORTS OF 2018-2019
OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS
SI.No. Sections NatureofDefaults Numb rof

23 128 Books of account etc. to be keptbycompany Cases
27
24 129 Non furnishing true and fair value in thefinancial statement 215
25 133 profit for the year and balance of profit and Lossaccountis 1
overstated
26 134 Financial statements andboardreports 70
27 135 CorporateSocialResponsibility 19
28 137 Non-filing offinancialstatement 303
29 138 Internalaudit 3
30 139 Appointmentofauditors 5
31 143 DutiesofAuditors 16
32 146 Auditors to attendgeneralmeeting 5
33 147 Incorrect or Misleading reportbyAuditors 18
34 148 Non filing of CostAuditReports 60

35 149 Company to have boardofdirectors 2
36 152 Appointmentofdirectors 2
37 153 Non furnishing ofDINNo. 1
38 158 Failure to quote din & other particularsofdirectors 5
39 159 Punishmentforcontravention. 2
40 165 Directorsholdingdirectorshipinmorethanthresholdlimits 75
41 167 Vacation of officeofdirector 1
42 168 Resignationofdirector 1
43 170 Register of directors and key managerial personnelandtheir 2
shareholding
44 172 Limit of No. ofDirectors 7
45 173 Boardmeeting 5
100
SI.No. Sections Nature of Defaults Number of
Cases
(1) (2) (3) (4)
46 178 Constitution of Nomination and Remuneration Committee 19

47 179 Powers of board 3
48 182 Prohibition and restrictions regarding political contributions 3
49 184 Non -disclosures of Directors Interest 2
50 185 Loan to directors 3

51 186 Loan and Investment by Company 3
52 187 Investments of company to be held in its own name. 5
53 188 Related party transactions 6
54 196 Appointment of MD, WTD or Manager 2
55 197 Overall maximum managerial remuneration and managerial 4

remuneration in case of absence or inadequacy of profits
56 203 Appointment of key managerial personnel 14

57 204 Secretarial audit for bigger companies 3
58 206 Power to call for information, inspect books and conduct 132
inquiries
59 207 Conduct of inspection and inquiry 81
60 217 Procedure, Powers, etc. of Inspectors 1

61 301 Arrest person trying to leave India 3
62 447 Punishment for fraud 18
63 448 Punishment for False Statement 37
64 450 Punishment where no specific penalty or punishment is 25

provided.
65 454 Nonpayment of adjudication penalty 59
108 r/w rule
66 20&30of
Non-Compliance of Section 108 1
Companies
(Management &
Administration)
Rules, 2014
Sections Nature of Defaults Number of

SI.No. Cases
(1) (2) (3) (4)
101
67 125 Not filed forms for creation, modification and satisfaction 1
of charge
68 383A,203 Appointment of KMP/Service on foreign company 1
69 Rule 16 Non filing of Form DPT-3 2

of
Deposit
Rules
70 Rule 21 of Non filing of acceptance ofdeposit 32
Companies
Acceptance of
Deposit) Rule,
2014
71 Rule 24 S.T.707/2018 - Filed under Rule 24 of Nidhi Rules 2014 r.w. 2

of Nidhi S.406 &469 of CA 2013 for violation of Rule 6(J) and Rule 10
Rules (1) of Nidhi Rules
72 S403/ Dishonest misappropriation and cheating 1

418 IPC
Total 1,778
6.6.5 The Progress of prosecutions during the last three years from 2015-16 to 2018-19 is
indicatedinTable6.4:
Table 6.4.
Progress of Prosecution during the last three Years
SL Subject 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

No.
r 1
(2)
Number of companies prosecuted
(3)
2,308
(4)
1,764
J (5)
958
during the year
2 Number of prosecutions started 4,522 3,972 2,573
during the year
3 Number of prosecutions pending at 46,979 48,987 44,278
the beginning of the year
4 Number of prosecutions disposed 2,513 8,681 12,886
during the year
TRUE TYPED COPY

102
ANNEXURE P-17
Date: 13.07.2020
To,
1. The Secretary,
Ministry of Corporate Affairs,
Shastri Bhawan,
Rajendra Prasad Road,
New Delhi - 110001.
2. Ministry of Law andJustice,

(Through Its Secretary)
Shastri Bhawan,
Rajendra Prasad Road,
New Delhi - 110001.
3. The Institute of Company Secretaries of India,

22, ICSI House, Lodhi Road,
Institutional Area, Lodhi Colony,
New Delhi – 110003.
Sub: Representation for reviewing the enhancement of Paid-Up

Capital from Rs. 5 Crores to Rs. 10 Crores for hiring of the
Company Secretaries and seeking for withdrawal of notification
of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs 03.01.2020, which is
effective from 01.04.2020 and continue with the Old Rule 8A of
the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial
Personnel) Rules, 2014 and for review of any exemptions to the
companies on the basis of size or the paid-up capital
compromising corporate governance and ensuring the
governance irrespective of the size of the company and request to
develop a robust corporate governance mechanism to ensure the
effective governance of the corporate entities in the interest of
the common people, Company Secretaries Profession and in the
interest of the Nation.
Dear Sir(s),
103
1. That the present representation is being filed by the

applicant who is fellow member of Institute of Company
Secretaries of India (ICSI) an apex statutory body for
Corporate Governance and he is also an activist and
working for social causes and betterment of education
beside his lively hood. This representation have been
filed in the capacity of citizen of this country drawing the
immediate attention of the above mentioned addresses
towards the serious compromise with Corporate
Governance, due diligence and compliances impacting
the economic growth of this country, interest of all the
stake holders connected with corporate including banks,
financial institutions and common people of this country
who deals with them and for taking the corrective actions
thereof.
2. Further, the instant representation have been preferred to
challenge the constitutional validity of the notification
dated 03.01.2020 amending Rule 8A of Companies
(Appointment and Remuneration of Managerial
Personnel) Rules, 2014 (“RULES”) w.e.f. 01.04.2020
whereby the financial limits (paid up- capital) for
engagement of whole time Company Secretary (“C.S.”)
has been enhanced from the Rs. 5 Crores to Rs. 10
Crores, immediate stay thereof, and continuance of Old
Rule 8A of the Companies (Appointment and
Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014
which was notified on 09.06.2014 and further for
withdrawal of the above said notification dated
03.01.2020 by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and
further to take urgent corrective measures against the
104
serious compromise noticed in the corporate India with

the Corporate Governance, compliances, due diligences.
Before discussing the relief and the directions thereof, the
kind attention of the above addresses have been drawn on
the following issues for your kind consideration:
i. That as per the annual report of MCA (Ministry of
Corporate Affairs) out of total 18,73,044 companies,
6,70,018 companies were closed [35.77% (more than
one third) of the total companies] due to non
compliances/ serious governance issues and only
11,56,374 companies were ACTIVE companies as on
31.03.2019. Here the attention of your good self is
drawn on the fact that inspite of the stringent
provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and also and
also the Companies Act, 2013 and the various
remedies of compounding of offences announced by
the Ministry from time to time how such pathetic
conditions has continued in Corporate India which has
laid to closure of the companies. The attention is also
drawn towards the fact that why the timely actions
have not been taken at the beginning of the non
compliances. Therefore, the present representation
seeks the immediate attentions for corrective measures
and non representations of such situation in future.
ii. Further, there were 33 Lakhs DINs (Director
Identification Number) in the registry and around
15.88 Lakhs DIN holders have filed DIR KYC as on
30.11.2018 (48.121% Directors remained non
complied inviting questions on their sanctity,
existence, and traceability). Non- availability/ non-
105
compliance by the Directors is also a very serious

concern in the light of above said percentage to ensure
Corporate Governance.
iii. Further, the attention of your good sefl is drawn
towards this fact that approx. one third of the
Corporate India remain in non complied zone for
number of years resulted the Government has decided
to close approx. one third of the total registered
companies as discussed above. The non filing of
Annual Accounts and Annual Returns remains a
serious question mark and even in presence of
Ministry of Corporate Affairs, ROC’s, ICSI and other
statutory institutions required attention and immediate
corrective measures by your good self. Further, inspite
of the closure of approx. One Third of the Companies
of the Corporate India, still in FY 2018-19 approx.
15,000 companies have not filed their balance sheet
and more than 50,000 companies have not filed annual
return. The existence and the operations of these
companies required to be checked and genuine reason
thereof else necessary actions may be required.
Sl. Financial No. of Non filing of Non filing of
No. Year Active Annual Annual
Companie Accounts Returns
s (% out of (% out of
Total Active Total Active
Companies) Companies)
1. 2013-14 9,52,433 30.62% 30.38%
2. 2014-15 10,22,011 24.55% 25.10%
3. 2015-16 10,88,780 37.91% 40.05%
4. 2016-17 11,69,303 27.22% 30.04%
5. 2017-18 11,67,858 18.73% 19.69%
6. 2018-19 11,56,374 1.36% 4.39%
iv. Not only this, the listed entities which have collected
106
the funds from the initial public offering (IPO) and

further public offer has also got vanished which is
highly detrimental to the economic growth of this
country and is great loss to the common investor. As
per the answer place before Hon’ble Rajya Sabha
dated 13.03.2018, it has been stated that “the
Coordination and Monitoring Committee (CMC) has
been constituted for those listed entities which has
vanished after public issue during the year 1992-2005.
Out of 238 listed companies identified as Vanishing
Companies due to the efforts of the Ministry and Law
Enforcement Agencies 161 such companies have been
traced and 77 more companies are still in the list of
Vanishing Companies. That this fact puts a serious
question mark on Corporate Governance and the
corrective measures are required to avoid such
circumstances.
v. That as per the information available in the public
domain, list of the companies referred to as Vanishing
Companies as on 31.03.2019 which were listed on
Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) goes to 177. That it
invites the attention and the serious lapses in
Corporate Governance and actions thereof.
vi. That as per one case study on white collar crime
available on public domain (International Journal of
Engineering Development and Research) “One of the
major havoc that is created in present times is because
of mysterious disappearances of corporations. Of the
5651 companies listed in the Bombay Stock
Exchange. 2750 have vanished. It means that one out
107
of two companies that comes to the stock exchange to

raise Crores of rupees from investors’ loot runaway.
About 11 million investors have invested Rs 10,000
Crores in these 2750 companies. We have Securities
& Exchange Board of India, Reserve Bank of India
and Department of Companies Affairs to monitor the
stock exchange transactions but none has documented
the whereabouts of these 2750 odd companies
suspended from the stock exchange.” This fact reflects
immediate cognizance should be taken on the issue of
vii. That as per the report of Live Mint dated 12.06.2019
“Bank frauds worth Rs2.05 Trillion happened in last
11 years, reveals RBI data”. Over 50 thousand frauds
hit banks in India FY09-FY19, RBI said in response to
an RTI query by them. It reflects serious lapses in
Corporate Governance by the concerned entities and
required the indulgence of your good self to avoid any
such circumstances.
viii. That as per one report, ET BUREAU dated
30.08.2019 available in the public domain “Indian
Banking System detected Rs 71,500 Crores worth of
frauds in FY2018-19 which to put in scale each
slightly more than the Rs 71,000 Crores
recapitalization package planned by the Government
to revive the health of its public sector bank. As per
the report of the Press Trust of India dated 04.06.2019
“ Reserve Bank of India in an RTI reply has disclosed
that over 6800 cases of bank frauds involving an
unprecedented Rs71,500 Crores were reported in FY
108
2018-19 as against a total of 5,916 such cases in

FY2017-18 involving Rs 41,167.03 Crores. It reflects
serious lapses by the concerned corporate entities and
required working on the data bases of such companies
and remedial actions thereof.
ix. Further there are a lot of critical compliances are
based on paid up capital, turnover, net worth and loans
and borrowings of the corporate however, no such
data or informations are available anywhere in public
domain or either in the Annual Report of Ministry of
Corporate Affairs or of the ICSI and hence, these
informations of the Corporate India should be
captured in the monthly report. It is also an humble
prayer to the Secretary of the Ministry of the
Corporate Affairs that the details of the non
compliances and the status thereof should also be
captures in the monthly bulletins of the Ministry of
Corporate Affairs.
x. It is also shocking that as per the data base of the
Annual Report of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs in
last five years from FY 2013 TO FY 2017-18 more
than one third companies of India have failed in filing
the Annual Returns and even Annual Accounts
thereof. However, the total prosecution for non filing
of Annual Returns under the Companies Act, 2013
and The Companies Act, 1956 comes to 403 however,
even we take the non filing of Annual Return of 2017-
18 it is 2,29,984 hence the percentage of prosecution
comes to 0.17%. That similarly total prosecution filed
on April, 2018 to March, 2019 was 632. Even if we
109
take FY2017-18 approx 2,18,738 companies have not

filed their Annual Accounts and if we convert the
prosecution into the percentage it comes to 0.28%
only.
xi. It is also shocking that as per the Annual Report of the
Ministry of Corporate Affairs there is total pending
prosecutions across the Country is 33,965 against
21,373 companies however, we have noticed that
6,21,966 companies have been declared defunct/
struck of by the ROC, even if we consider it as a
severely non complied companies and actions have
been taken on only 21,373 companies in the past it
comes around 3.43% only and there is no disclosure of
other actions.
xii. That the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and its Annual
Reports are completely silent on compliance, non
compliance and the action thereof and also the ICSI
being the apex body in the Corporate Governance
have never bothered to analyze and suggest requisite
action to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.
xiii. The clear provisions of whole time appointments of
the Company Secretaries remains since 1975 however,
the applicant has noticed wondering the members for
the employment and it have been non complied by
several companies in the last twenty years. Neither the
ICSI nor the Ministry of Corporate Affairs have
disclosed any informations in the public domain for
the compliance or the non compliance of such
provisions which is highly detrimental and serious
compromise with the Corporate Governance inspite of
110
the clear intents and specific provisions engrafted by

the legislatures. That the applicant has noticed that
there is only 29 cases of prosecutions of non hiring of
KMP’s or Company Secretaries and no actions have
been taken inspite of the facts that the above said
provisions remains non complied for a long time. That
the ICSI has also failed in ensuring the compliances of
the said provisions and the compliance thereof hence,
the kind attention of your good self is drawn for the
necessary measures.
xiv. That such a serious compromise with the Corporate
Governance besides being detrimental to the public at
large has also affected the revenue receipt of the
Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the effective
Corporate Governance can create more employment
opportunities and the work for the professionals rather
than making free of the defaulters or the violators of
Law. That there is a great possibility of high revenues
to the Government by the compounding of offences,
penalties, fines etc and engagement of the
professionals and deterrent message to the offenders.
No need to mention that in approx. most of the white
collar crimes of this country the offender have
misused the several corporate entities being behind the
screen and further neither the companies nor the
directors are being traced and ultimately they are
mostly remain unpunished and great loss to the
economy and the common people and the investors.
xv. There were more than 18,73,044 companies in India
and after closure we have 11,56,374 active companies
111
as on 31.03.2019. Further, it has been noticed that

there is no concept of random checks on the Corporate
Governance or suo moto inspections, visits of different
corporate even sample check. This also invites the
attention of your good self for remedial actions
thereof.
xvi. That it also hereby submitted that more than 90,000
companies are being incorporated per year and the
ICSI is making approx. 4000 to 5000 members in a
year. The concept of company secretaries originated
from the parliamentary discussion of the Companies
Act, 1956 and recognized by the legal provisions in
the year 1975 and in the year 1980 the ICSI has come,
however approx. 40 years has gone and the ICSI has
failed in making the more members for better service
of the Corporate India. Further, with respect to time,
no campus or sufficient infrastructure has been
developed to add more students and adding more
members. The ICSI has failed in maintaining the
transparency that out of their total members how many
members are in employment, in practice and how
many members have opted other profession inspite of
getting the membership of the ICSI. Further, there
should be the clear provisions of surrendering the
membership and the necessary directions thereof if
any member have opted some other professions. That
the ICSI has also not presented the data in its annual
report or on its website that how many company
secretaries are required in the country, how many
companies have complied it and how many companies
112
have not complied it and if not complied what actions

have been taken against them. If the legislature has
framed any law it should be duly complied.
xvii. Further, no exemptions should be granted to any
companies of this country on the ground of size, paid-
UP capital and the corporate governance should be
ensured irrespective of paid- up capital , turnover and
net worth. Therefore, the classification under the
Companies Act and the rules thereof notified by the
Ministry of the Corporate Affairs by granting the
exemptions from hiring of the company secretaries in
the basis of paid- up capital under Section 203 and
relevant rules 8 AND 8A of the Companies
Personnel) Rules, 2014 and further the exemptions
from certification by the company secretaries under
Section 92 of the Companies Act, 2013 should be
withdrawn.
xviii. Further, the mechanism for ensuring robust corporate
governance should be developed irrespective of size
and other criteria. Further it also submitted that the
possibilities of involvement remain more of small
companies in white collar crimes and there should be
no exemptions to them in the light of the track records
of the historical lapses in compliances of the Law of
the Land.
 SUMMARY OF RELIEFS SOUGHT FOR :
Therefore, in the light of the above it is crystal clear that
there should not be any compromise with the Corporate
Governance, compliances and due diligences irrespective
113
of size of the company. That 2,34,371 companies have

been got defunct/struck of during the financial year 2017
– 18 and similarly 1,38,446 companies during the year
2018-19. The question of serious lapses in the Corporate
Governance remains against these companies and their
directors. That the Ministry have issued the various
schemes in the past for compounding/ resolving of the
various non compliances and their remains the concept of
declaring the company as a dormant company or get it
strike off automatically with the help of the ROC or to
voluntarily liquidate the company. However, the
concerned officials of these companies have not opted for
legal course of action for the closure of the company.
These companies were either fake, fabricated, have been
created for malicious intent or objectives and no effective
actions have been taken against them. It have been
noticed that various companies remains the part of the
white collar crimes or have been utilized for malicious,
illegal economic activities. The striking of the company
or declaring a defunct without any action gives very bad
message to the public at large. In the light of the above
facts there should be more responsibilities towards the
ensuring the Corporate Governance on Ministry of
Corporate Affairs and also upon the Institute of
Companies Secretaries of India. Further all the companies
the of the Corporate India should ensure the Corporate
Governance under the supervision of the Ministry of
Corporate affairs and the bigger role for the members of
the Institute of Companies Secretaries of India to avoid
such circumstances and effective actions thereof. Further
114
recently the Ministry of Corporate Affairs have issued the

notification dated 03.01.2020 effective from 01.04.2020
should be immediately stayed which is detrimental to the
Therefore, this representation has been made for drawing
the attention of the above addresses towards the following
relief:
(i) To set aside the Notification dated 03.01.2020 of
Ministry of Corporate Affairs i.e. Rule 8A of the
Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 “8A. Every
private company which has a paid up share capital
of ten Crores or more shall have a whole – time
company Secretary.” (Consequently overall impact
and meaning thereby no appointment of Company
Secretary is mandatory if the paid up capital of any
company is less than Rs 10 Crores).
(ii) That the Ministry of Corporate Affairs should
continue with Rule 8A with earlier which was
inserted with effect from 09.06.2014 as under “Rule
8A - Appointment of Companies Secretaries in
Companies not covered Under Rule 8—A company
other than a company covered under Rule 8 which
has a paid up capital of five crore rupees or, one
shall have a whole time company secretary
(Consequently meaning thereby all the companies
whose paid up capital are above 5 Crores should
hire a Whole Time Company Secretary as usual
since 2009.)
115
(iii) That the Ministry of Corporate Affairs should make

further rules for hiring of Wholetime Company
Secretary for better Corporate Governance as
under:.
 “Every company which has:
a. Net worth of one hundred crores rupees or more; or
b. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or
rupees or more; or
c. Turnover of one hundred crores crore rupees or
more shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary.
paid up share capital, net worth, outstanding loans
or borrowings or turnover as the case may be
existing on the last date of latest audited financial
(iv) Further, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs should
make the rules for compliance certification of all the
ACTIVE companies whatever be the size, paid up
capital, turnover or net worth of the company,
where there is no Wholetime Company Secretary or
Secretarial Auditor and to ensure better Corporate
Governance.
(v) Further, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs should
issue directions for the Permanent Secretarial
Auditor like Statutory Auditor in the prescribed
company for five years.
(vi) The direction to the Institute of Company
Secretaries of India for maintaining the clear data
base of the company secretaries who are in
116
employment or practice or in some other profession

and to keep close watch on number of company
secretaries required in the market and number of
available members with close coordination with
ministry and the same should be disclosed regularly
in its annual report. The ICSI should also address
the summary of the compliances, database by
Corporate India and specific compliance of
provisions of appointment of Company Secretaries
and the data thereof in its Annual Report.
(vii) The direction should be issued to ICSI being the
apex body in the Corporate Governance and also to
the Ministry of Corporate Affairs on making the
regular disclosure pertaining to number of
companies with respect to turnover, net worth, paid
up capital, loans and borrowings in its annual report.
The Ministry should also regularly disclose the total
number of non compliances noticed during the year
and action taken report thereof in its annual report.
(viii) That the directions should be issued to take the
requisite actions against the defaulters who have
continuously non complied the different provisions
of The Companies Act, 2013 or The Companies Act,
1956 in the past and to review the entire issues and
disclosure of the same in its Annual Report
including specific compliance of hiring of company
secretaries, secretarial auditors and certifications
thereof.
(ix) To develop robust corporate governance mechanism
to ensure the governance of the corporate entities.
117
 BACKGROUND OF RECENT AMENDMENTS VIDE

NOTIFICATION DATED 03.01.2020 EFFECTIVE FROM
01.04.2020.
The MCA have taken the initiative to weed out inactive
companies and disqualified directors, protect the public
money, overcome the financial irregularities and increase
the effectiveness of the governance mechanism. India is
perhaps the only country where a form like INC-22A
(ACTIVE) is introduced. The MCA has notified form no.
INC-22A- ACTIVE (Active Company Tagging Identities
and Verification) and have asked for all substantial details
ensuring whereabouts of the company, its management,
Company Secretaries, Auditors etc. and have asked for
email id with OTP confirmation, Photographs of
registered office with directors/ KMP with longitude and
latitude, complete whereabout of all directors, complete
details of statutory auditors, complete details of cost
auditors, complete details of Managing Directors or CEO
or Managers or Whole Time Directors, Company
Secretary if applicable, CFO, details of filing of balance
sheets, Annual return for the financial year 2017-18 duly
signed by stated officials and along with their
certifications. It was also stated that, if the company
does not intimate the said particulars, the company shall
be marked as “ACTIVE- non-compliant” on or after 26th
April, 2019 and shall be liable for action under Sub-
section (9) of section 12 of the Act:
Provided also that no request for recording the following
event based information or changes shall be accepted by
the Registrar from such companies marked as “ACTIVE
118
non- compliant”, unless “e-Form ACTIVE” is filed.

As the above said initiatives of the Ministry have left no
place for the violators and non compliances they have
created a cartel and started raising the concern for non
availability of the company secretaries or the costing or
the various false and frivolous issues and have created a
cartel to evade from the express provision of law for
appoint of company secretaries and also to evade from
providing the other substantial details to be provided to
the MCA in the name of non availability of the company
secretaries making it as a MOHRA for continued non
compliances, not only this some of the professionals have
raised this issue wrongly on the basis of professional
biasness
Here it should be noted that there were 35,158 Company
Secretaries in India as on 31st March, 2014 and there were
approx. 27,785 companies above the pad-up capital of Rs
5 Crores or more. There was no issue of less number Of
company secretaries in the market in the past rather the
members have faced difficulties in getting the job due to
the evading attitudes of this important provisions of
hiring of company secretaries in the past. Further, neither
any annual report of the MCA nor the Annual report or
the media or any such information were available in the
public domain at any time as per the knowledge of the
applicant. Here it should be noted that the applicant have
carefully gone through the various annual reports of the
ICSI and MCA since year ending with 31st March, 2013.
From the above said report it is ambit clear that there was
no issue pertaining to less number of company secretaries
119
in the market.
The Companies Act, 2013 has replaced the Companies
Act, 1956 with the core objective of self governance,
great transparency and being more stringent towards the
violation of the provisions of the enactment. Since, 2009
all the companies having the paid up capital of Rs 5
Crores or more, it was mandatory for them to hire the
company secretary for ensuring the compliances of the
Companies Act and other enactments and watch the
interest of the investors, company and other stake holders.
As per the report dated 01.01.2015, data dated
31.12.2014, there were 11,532 companies holding the
total paid up capital of Rs 83,376.46 Crores. The above
said amendment is not only serious compromise with the
Corporate Governance of those companies rather also
impacts the employment and livelihood of more than 11
thousand company secretaries across the country and
more than 4 Lakhs students across the country preparing
for being the member s of the ICSI.
The amendment is arbitrary being passed without
ascertaining any need, cause of action and without
application of mind, ignoring the representations sent by
the Statuary body i.e. Institute of Companies Secretary
(“I.C.S.I.”).
Rule 8A of the Companies (Appointment and Remuneration of
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014
OLD RULE w.e.f. 31.03.2014 NEW RULE w.e.f.
01.04.2020
A company other than a company Every private company
120
covered under Rule 8 which has a which has a paid-up share

paid-up capital of five Crore capital of ten Crore rupees or
rupees or more, shall have a more shall have a whole –
whole-time company secretary. time company Secretary. [As
(notified on 09.06.2014) [Since, per this amendment effective
2009 as per the provisions of from which was notified on
Companies Act, 1956 all the 03.01.2020 effective from
companies having the paid up 01.04.2020 , there is no
capital of Rs 5 Crores or more requirement of having the
were mandatory required to hire Company Secretary for the
Whole Time Company companies having the paid
Secretary.] up capital less than Rs 10
Crores. As on 31.03.2014,
approx. 11, 532 companies
are falling within the bracket
of Rs 5 Cores to Rs 10
Crores.
That applicant raises an objection for enhancement of financial

limit for engaging Company Secretary from Rs 5 crore to Rs 10
crore being the serious compromise with the Corporate
Governance.
It should also be noted that the said appointment of the
company secretaries was fully effective from 09th June, 2014
vide Rule 8 and 8A, of Companies (Appointment and
Remuneration Of Managerial Personnel) Rules. 2014 and
Section 203 of Companies Act, 2013 was effective since
beginning and Rule 8A was also notified with effect from 09 th
June, 2014. But none of the corporate across the country has
raised any issues as such and the habitual violator has opted for
121
non complying the same and have never raised this issue at any
time in the past and have non- complied the expressed
provisions during the financial year 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18
and 2018-19.
That the applicant has analyzed the emails forwarded by the
different corporate entities and their agents to the Ministry OF
Corporate Affairs which was forwarded to the ICSI and the
ICSI has already addressed all the queries. It was during the
analysis it was noticed that out of 34 grievances forwarded to
the MCA only 10 were relating to non availability of Company
Secretaries with the ulterior motives to avoid compliances and
these entities were not complying this provision for appointment
of company secretaries from the long time. The said analysis is
presented herewith in tabular mode for your kind consideration
which reflects that the said enhancement is arbitrary in nature
and need to be reviewed.
Sl. No. Name of the Company/ Remarks of the Applicant
Stakeholders
1. Chartered Accountant A. No Merit. Chartered Accountant
John Morris, Chennai. firm- The issue raised with
Letter Dated 09.04.2019. professional biasness.
2. G V K Power & The company has already company
Infrastructure Ltd. secretary since 01.10.2005 namely
Letter dated 04.04.2019 Mr. Puni Venkata Rama Seshu
(PAN- ACUPP3819Q). Hence the
grievances raised with malicious
intents without being the interested
party and is a big corporate house
as it reflects from assets and
charges as per the master data of
MCA.
122
3. Blue Berry Agro Products As per the master data and

Pvt. Ltd. , Mumbai. information collected from the
website it’s a big company but
violating the express provision of
law since 2014.
4. Local Circle - Social Grievances pertain to other issues.
Media Platform for Start
Up.
5. A.P. Towers Ltd., Andhra It is a PSU. The issue were raised
Pradesh. for no attracting the company
secretaries in view of scales of pay.
Hence, not relates to non
Institute has suggested fresher
company secretaries and also to
take the help of the placement cell
of ICSI. Hence, no merit in the
grievances.
6. Andhra Pradesh State It also a PSU and has raised other
Fiber Net Ltd. issue not connected with company
secretaries and have raised only the
point of no able to attract company
secretaries in view of low pay
scales. Institute has suggested
fresher company secretaries and
also to take the help of the
placement cell of ICSI. Hence, no
merit in the grievances.
7. Tamilnadu Spinning Mills Have not mentioned the name of
Association, Dindigul, any company and have simply
Chennai. asked for exemption from filing of
INC-22A ACTIVE stating that
companies are not able to find the
suitable candidate possessing the
123
requisite qualification as company

secretaries. ICSI has offered the
services of placement cell if there
is nay such instances.
8. South India Importers Have not mentioned the name of
Association, Chennai. any company and have simply
asked for exemptions of the private
company stating the reason that
most of the private companies are
not able to find the suitable
candidates possessing the requisite
qualifications. However, the ICSI
has clarified the issue and offered
the placement cell services of ICSI
for granting the relief if any such
case exists hence, it was a roving
grievances without any base to
evade from the express provision of
law.
9. P. Krishna & Associates, The issues were clarified by the
Chartered Accountant , ICSI and there remains nothing.
Chennai. The issue have been raised with the
professional biasness to support the
evading route of the express
provision of law. The exemption
was asked in the name of ease of
doing business. There was no
question of non availability of
company secretaries.
10. Manjunath, Chartered The issue was clearly addressed by
Accountant, Chennai. the ICSI. Further there was no
question of non availability of the
11. Jainex Aamcol Ltd. It is a listed company fully covered
124
under the express provision of law.

No question of non availability of
company secretaries. Further the
issue was addressed by the ICSI.
12. Our Investments As per the master data, the paid up
Enterprise Ltd., capital of the company is Rs
Ernakulum 20,21,100 and hence there is no
need of appointment of company
secretaries. The issue have been
raised with malicious intents
without being he interested party.
Hnece, no merit.
13. Agasthiyar Muni Child The issue was raised that the
Care Centre, Kanyakumari company secretaries were not
District, South India. available in the market who are
willing to join the companies of
their size and operations. Issue was
addressed completely by ICSI and
have also offered the help of the
placement cell of ICSI.
14. P.H.D. Chamber of The issue was pertaining to
Commerce & Industry. technical issue of MCA portal and
not related to company secretaries.
15. Kaytee Corporation Pvt. The case of the complainant is the
Ltd., Mumbai clear violation of law and self
admission for working on hiring of
company secretaries only from last
few months and it have been made
with clear malicious intents and
seems to be a fit case for legal
action against them for non
compliance of law.
16. South India Mills Without naming the company have
Association made a roving allegation of non
125
finding the company secretaries for

few companies. ICSI has offered
for immediate placement services if
there is any case as such hence no
merit in the case
Sl. No. Name of the Company/ Remarks of the Applicant

Stakeholders
Sunsea Traders Ltd. Company Secretary.
Sunsea Cruise Lines Ltd. Company Secretary.
Sunsea Euro Ventures Ltd. Company Secretary.
Seaways Maritime India Ltd. Company Secretary.
SunSea Travels (India) Ltd. Company Secretary.
Tradehall Markets Ltd. Company Secretary.
7. Aditya Garg Issue not relating to appointment of
(email dated 14.06.2019) Company Secretary.
8. RSC International Ltd. The company has raised the issue
Letter dated 08.06.2019 of non finding of Company
Secretaries inspite of their efforts.
The ICSI have clarified that he has
never approached to the placement
126
cell of ICSI and the information

rendered by him is incorrect and
have clarified the other issues in
detail. The question is whether the
company has complied the said
provisions since 2013-14, 2014-15,
2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18.
Further, the company has already
appointed the CS on 01.07.2019
after this notification of INC-22A
and his allegation that no company
secretary is available does not
sustain and his matter already
resolved.
9. IMC Chambers of The ICSI has already clarified its
Commerce and Industry issues and suggested for fresher
Letter dated 17.06.2019 company secretary. They have also
suggested to add turn over criteria
and it has been also suggested by
the ICSI and being supported and
requested by the applicant.
10 IMC Chambers of Not pertains to the issue of
Commerce and Industry appointment of company
Letter dated 18.06.2019 secretaries.
11. Narayan Jain, patron Roving statement have been made
Legal Relief Society to increase the limit without any
Email dated 18.06.2019. reason thereof hence does not
sustain. It is also a case of
professional biasness (To check the
background of this society.)
12. Southern India Mills Same letter have been sent twice
Association and have already been clarified by
Letter dated 13.06.2019. the ICSI in its reply dated
08.07.2019.
127
13. S Sundar Raman He is a practicing Chartered

Email dated 13.06.2019 Accountant and have raised this
objection due to professional
biasness. No merit in the case. ICSI
has already clarified the issue in
detail.
14. Ketan H Deshmukh The issue is not relating to
Email dated 18.06.2019 appointment of company
secretaries
Development Corporation appointment of company
Ltd. secretaries
Development Corporation appointment of company
Ltd. secretaries
17. CA K. Gopala Krishna The issue is not relating to
Letter dated 11.06.2019 appointment of company
secretaries
18. Liquors India Ltd. This company is violating the law
Letter dated 26.06.2019. since long time and have not
appointed company secretary
inspite of clear provisions of law.
When the Ministry have launched
INC-22A and left no option for
them they have came up with
excuses of non availability if
company secretary.
 EXPLANATION AND ARBITRAINESS ON PAID-UP

CAPITAL AND THE AMENDED NOTIFICATION
THEREOF.
Through the Companies Amendment Act, 1974, Sec. 383 A was
128
inserted in the Companies Act, 1956 stating that

“383A. CERTAIN COMPANIES TO HAVE SECRETARIES :
(1) Every company [having such paid-up share capital as may
be prescribed] shall have a whole time secretary, and where
the Board of directors of any such company comprises only
two directors, neither of them shall be the secretary of the
company.
[Provided that every company not required to employ a
whole time secretary under sub-section (1) and having a
paid-up share capital of ten Lakhs rupees or more shall file
with the Registrar a certificate from a secretary in whole
time practice in such form and within such time and subject
to such conditions as may be prescribed, as to whether the
company has complied with all provisions of this Act and a
copy of such certificate shall be attached with Board's report
referred to in section 217.]
At that time the profession was nascent stage and the
members were less hence the criteria for hiring of company
secretaries was considered as Rs 25 Lakhs paid up capital
which has gone to Rs 5 Crores by several changes in due
course. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has
introduced Companies Secretaries Act, 1980, “An act to
make provisions for the regulation and the development of
the profession of Company Secretaries.” and the Institute of
Companies Secretaries of India was incorporated as statutory
body under the supervision and control of Ministry of
Corporate Affairs (MCA).
The paid up capital of the company represents the ownership
of the company and the ratio of its contribution by different
equity share holders. Even a company with the minimum
129
paid up capital has great opportunities for extending the

business with the help of the debt, loans, financial assistance
of the different institutions, corporate and can have big turn
over in the market. It should also be noted that as per the
current practice very small amount of investments are being
considered in the paid up capital and the balance funds being
treated as share premium as a part of reserve and surplus. For
understanding recently Reliance Industries issued share at
Rs. 1250/- (approx..) out of which only 10 was invested in
paid-up capital and rest went to reserves and surplus, in this
transaction company’s paid capital increased only by Rs. 10
whereas money invested by the shareholder is Rs. 1250/-
(per share), hence any figure which denotes paid-up capital
not necessarily denotes the actual amount invested by a
shareholder. Further, in the past TCS has issued shares of
face value of Rs 1 (paid up capital value Rs 1) in Rs. 700, so
here by the investment of Rs 700 the paid up capital will
increase by only Rs 1 and Rs 699 will be share premium and
will be the part of reserve and surplus.
Below mentioned entities datas are used for illustrative
purpose to show entities having huge turnover with no
compulsory company secretary as paid up capital is below
the limit to have compulsory C.S.
S.No. Name of the Company Paid up capital Turnover
(INR) (INR)
approx. approx.
1. Apple India Pvt Ltd 3,50,020 13048 Cr.
2. Google India Pvt Ltd 1,07,38,790 9338 Cr.
3. HP (India) Pvt. Ltd 2,80,31,840 500 Cr
4. Microsoft Corp. (India) 2,41,14,760 7301 Cr.

130
Pvt Ltd
5. Bikanervala Foods Pvt ltd 85,00,000 4000 Cr.
6. Rolls Royce India Pvt Ltd 1,03,72,70 100-500 Cr.
7. Himalaya Drug Co. Pvt. 1,00,200 1800 Cr.
Ltd.
Therefore, in view of the data reproduced, it can be said that
Paid-up capital of the company is one of the criteria to represent
the size of the company other than turnover, net worth, loans
and borrowings. Company even with less paid-up capital can
have large economic activity and turnover. It can be said that
the value of Rs. 5 crore paid-up capital is enough for carrying
various large activities with or without the help of the various
banks, NBFCs, financial institutions and other financial support
and hence the requirement of the company secretary for the
capital of Rs. 5 Crore or more is fully justified.
Therefore, even a company with a small paid up capital can
have huge turn over and it deals with various banks and
financial institutions. It has also been noticed in the past that
small corporate entities are more utilized for ulterior motives
being either fake, fabricated and have been created for
malicious intent or objective and therefore more governance is
needed in these companies to avoid its mis utilization. It have
been noticed that various companies remains the part of the
white collar crimes or have been utilized for malicious, illegal
economic activities. The striking of the company or declaring a
defunct without any action gives very bad message to the public
at large.
That the MCA in the year 2014 had notified Companies
Rules, 2014 which got notified on 31.03.2014 and vide Rule 8,
131
where every listed company and every other public company

having a paid up share capital of 10 crore or more shall have a
whole time key managerial personnel. The said rule being
arbitrary resulted in an amendment pursuant to which
Government had further notified an amended notification dated
09.06.2014 by inserting Rule 8A which states the limit for
appointment of Company Secretaries i.e. 5 crore for
engagement of whole time C.S.
That after the commencement of the Companies Act 2013, the
provision for the appointment of the whole-time company
secretaries were in effect vide Rule 8 and 8A, of Companies
(Appointment and Remuneration Of Managerial Personnel)
Rules. 2014 and Section 203 of the Companies Act 2013. It is
important to mention here that none of the corporate across the
country had raised any issue till the commencement of INC- 22A
in the year 2019, pursuant to which 17 defaulter entities showed
their inability to engage C.S. and to cover-up their default sent
grievance with concocted stories before the MCA.
ICSI send a detailed response by entertaining each and every
issue. It is clear from the letters and reply annexed with the
representation that grievance were mere excuses for ignoring
Corporate Governance, mandatory compliance and step to escape
from penalties.
Here it is important to mention that defaulters who chose to
proceed without the compliance of Section 203 i.e. engagement
of full time C.S. In their grievance to MCA used an excuse of
shortage of company secretary which perhaps resulted in an
initiation of amendment procedure.
M.C.A. forwarded the concerned letters to I.C.S.I. for
ascertaining the grievances which was replied, stating in detail
132
that there is No Shortage of Company Secretary, and further gave

the figures that there are 35,158 Company Secretaries in India as
on 31.03.2014 and there were approx. 27,785 companies required
whole time company secretary hence there is no shortage of
Furthermore, with respect to the issue of shortage of company
secretary neither the ICSI or MCA Annual report nor any report
or the media or any such information available in the public
domain at any time to justify the same.
It is important to state that after going through the contents
one can determine that defaulters formed a cartel and
misrepresented the MCA to escape from penalty, mandatory
checks and balances by using company secretary as a puppet for
continued non compliance of Corporate Governance.
That even I.C.S.I. vide its letter dated 08.07.2019 had
addressed M.C.A. in response to the grievance forwarded by the
stakeholders and have stated that the present parameters for
appointment of Company Secretary framed by MCA are
absolutely aligned with the present requirements; and therefore,
need to be kept intact.
It is important to mention here that before amending the limit
under Rule 8 A, Ministry of Corporate Affairs had taken
discussed and took opinion over the issue from I.C.S.I. But none
was appreciated.
The I.C.S.I. has suggested M.C.A. for adding the criteria of
turnover and net worth in addition to the paid-up capital.
Moreover, most importantly if anyone is aggrieved from
compliance of section 203 or wishes to avoid compliance then
instead of being a violator, an option to reduce the paid-up
capital can be availed.
133
The number of active companies with the paid-up capital is

as under (Report dated 01.01.2015, data dated 31.12.2014.)
Distribution of Active
Companies with respect to
Paid-up Capital Paid-up
Paid up capital Range Total No. of Companies Capital
Above 1 crore to 2
crore 32,207 47,709.94
2 cr to 5 cr 29,390 96,959.99
5 cr to 10 cr 11,532 83,376.46
10 cr to 25 cr 8,635 136,177.40
25 cr to 100cr 5,279 253,894.63
100 cr to 500 cr 1,752 370,176.43
500 cr to 1000 cr 288 202,021.28
Above 1000 crore 299 967,384.54
As per the said report the number of companies in the bracket of

paid up capital above Rs. 5 crores to Rs 10 crores were 11,532 .It
is important to mention here that figures in above table pertains
till 31.12.2014 and as of now numbers would have increased
hence impugned notification not only compromising with
Corporate Governance for minimum 11,532 companies.
That the I.C.S.I. also being dissatisfied with the said amendment
and rejection of its repeated proposals sent a letter dated
10.01.2020 for further amendment in the rule and gave
suggestions.
ARBITRARINESS AND SERIOUS ISSUES OF
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE THEREOF:
a. Inspite of express and clear legal position it has been
noticed that a lot of companies have intentionally have not
hired the company secretaries and have non complied the
134
provision since long back and have made malicious

compromise with the Corporate Governance. Not only this
it has been noticed that out of approx. 18.5 Lakhs
Companies approx one third are even not complying with
the annual filing of balance sheets and annual returns. A
lot of cases of non existence of the registered offices,
absconded directors have been noticed and there was not
whereabout, communication and compliance by these
companies and hence there were big challenges to review
the entire current corporate system and to insure the
whereabouts, compliances from the corporate who wants
to continue. Not only this the Ministry has decided to
removal of names of the companies from the Registrar of
the Companies (ROC) and 2,34,357 companies were
closed during the financial year 2017-18 totaling to the
paid up capital of Rs 14593.95 Crores, similarly in the
financial year 2018-19, 1,38,432 companies were struck
off with the total paid up capital of Rs 12753.19 Crores.
The statics of the companies registered, and company
closed are being clear from the following tables taken from
annual report of the MCA.
 Table 3.13
o Number of Companies Closed during Financial Year 2011-
12 to 2018-19
Converted
Financial
Liquidated/Diss Defunct/Struck- Amalgamated/ to LLP and
year
olved off Merged Dissolved Total
2011-12 250 37,857 3,241 774 42,122
2012-13 141 13,138 1,999 681 15,959
2013-14 81 10,473 1,550 1,170 13,274
135
2014-15 112 16,558 1,931 4,068 22,669

2015-16 26 13,464 1,607 3,097 18,194
2016-17 16 7,743 1,890 2,959 12,608
2017-18 194 234,371 1,695 2 236,262
2018-19 155 138,446 2,061 2,571 143,233
b. Not only this, there were shocking results on whereabouts

of the directors and KYC thereof. MCA has introduced a
mandatory e-Form viz. DIR-3 KYC for all DIN holders
who have been allotted DIN on or before 31ST March,
2018 and whose DIN is in approved status. This drive is
aimed at verification of individual DIN holders and weed
out non-existent/ dummy DIN holders and ultimately to
clean up the Directors’ e- Registry. The KYC process is
obtaining additional details such as AADHAR, Passport,
personal mobile number and personal email id. Further, for
stakeholders who do not possess AADHAR, an exception
management is provided. There are around 33 Lakhs DINs
in the registry and around 15.88 Lakhs DIN holders have
filed DIR KYC as on 30th November, 2018. In this drive,
MCA managed to feed 11 Lakhs AADHAR Card holders.
This is one of its kinds of drive carried out anywhere in
India. [The extract is taken from Page 85. Para 8.5.1, Sub-
para v. from 5th Annual Report (Year ending 31.03.2019)
of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.)
c. However, it is shocking that when the applicant has
analyzed the filing of Annual Reports/ Accounts by
different companies and the annual returns and non
compliances thereof it was shocking. It was noticed that
even in the FY 2018-19, it was shocking that approx. 2 to
136
4 Lakhs companies have not filed the annual accounts to

the MCA, the exact figures year wise is available in the
table and it was shocking that even in the FY 2018-19,
15,693 companies have not filed their financials and
50,866 companies have not filed their annual return even
in FY 2018-19. The figures from FY 2013-14 TO 2108-19
shocked the mind of the applicant. It was also shocking
that approx. one third of the active companies have neither
filed their annual accounts or the annual return with the
Ministry. The question raised for the kind consideration
your good self that if such was the level of non
compliances what was the other action which has been
taken by the MCA and what was the ultimate results of the
same. Such types of severe non compliances are highly
destructive for the economy and trust of the common
public of the country.
d. The company may be public, private or listed but in the
real sense there is nothing private in nature and being the
legal entity all the corporate deals with common public,
banks, financial institutions and if one third of the
Corporate India remain even not able to present the annual
account and annual returns before the MCA and if no
requisite actions have been taken after the expiry of the
filing period or the extended period if thereof during the
financial year itself it remains a great question mark on the
working of the corporate world. Further these companies
may have defrauded a lot of investors, common public,
banks and financial institutions therefore; the action of
striking off the name of the company and only make them
disqualified cannot serve any purpose practically and
137
cannot be treated as justice with the public at large.

Analysis of Annual Filings by Companies - Defaults -
Prosecutions thereof from 2013-2019:
Analysis of Annual Filings by Companies - Defaults - Prosecutions thereof from 2013-2019
Non Filers Non Filers

Companies Companies
Active (Non Filing (Non Filing Prosecution launched Total
Compani of of Annual Prosecution launched under under Companies Prosecuti
S.No FY es (a) Total Financials) Return) Companies Act, 1956 Act, 2013Non ons DIN Issued
Financial Annual Non filing filing of
Statements Return Non filing of Non filing of of Annual Financia
Filed (b) (a)-(b) Filed (c) (a)-(c) Annual return Financials return ls
1 2018-19 1156374 1140681 15693 1105508 50866 43 85 318 303 749 305104
2 2017-18 1167858 949120 218738 937874 229984 261 241 452 743 1697 316191
3 2016-17 1169303 851007 318296 818006 351297 503 Not Available 2481 Not Available 2984 297961
4 2015-16 1088780 675992 412788 652707 436073 479 Not Available 155 Not Available 634 245095
5 2014-15 1022011 771043 250968 765392 256619 102 106 72 69 349 219647
6 2013-14 952433 660789 291644 663073 289360 2377 3524 NA NA 5901 245421
Source: Annual Report of MCA of various years.
e. It should further be noted that able 6.3a page no. 63 to

page no. 66 of the aforesaid annual report reflects the
nature of defaults and number of prosecutions during
01.04.2018 to 31.03.2019 under the Companies Act, 1956.
There are only 795 prosecutions/ number of cases. It is
also surprising that during this FY of 2018-19 very small
number of cases like for annual accounts and balance
sheets only 36 prosecutions has been lodged. That only 42
cases of non filing of annual reports have been reflected.
Similarly table 6.3b of page no. 67 to 71 of the annual
report 2019 year ending with 31.03.2019 reflects only 318
cases of non filing of the annual returns, 303 cases of non
filing of financial statements and only 215 cases of non
furnishing the true and fair value in the financial
138
statements. The extracts from the said table pertaining to

some important provisions are presented herewith for
immediate reference.
 Table 6.3(A)
o Nature of Defaults and Number of Prosecutions filed during
1st April, 2018 to 31st March, 2019 under Companies Act,
1956 – Extracts from table 6.3 (A) Annual Report of MCA
2019
S. No. of
Sections Nature of Defaults
No. Cases
(2) (3)
(1) (4)
Annual return to be made by company having a
1 159
share capital 43
2 162 Non filing of Annual Returns 42
3 166 Annual General Meeting 43
Form and contents of balance-sheet and profit and
4 211
loss a/c 174
5 217 Board's Report 30
6 220 Non filing of Balance Sheets 85
7 224 Appointment and remuneration of auditors 15
8 227 Powers and duties of auditors 20
9 233 Non compliance by auditor with section 227 28
10 628 Penalty for false statement 31
11 383A Non-appointment of Company's Secretary 14
12 58A Non repayment of matured fixed deposit 33
Total 558
 Table 6.3(B)
139
o Nature of Defaults and Number of Prosecutions filed during

1st April, 2018 to 31st March, 2019 under Companies Act,
2013 - Extracts from table 6.3 (B) Annual Report of MCA
2019
o
No.
S. Sections Nature of Defaults of
No. (2) (3) Cases
(1) (4)
1 92 Non filing of Annual Returns 318
2 96 Annual General Meeting 30
3 99 Non holding of Annual General Meetings 40
Non furnishing true and fair value in the financial
4 129 215
statement
5 134 Financial statements and board reports 70
6 137 Non-filing of financial statements 303
7 148 Non filing of Cost Audit Reports 60
8 203 Appointment of key managerial personnel 14
9 204 Secretarial audit for bigger companies 3
10 301 Arrest person trying to leave India 3
11 447 Punishment for fraud 18
12 448 Punishment for False Statement 37
Punishment where no specific penalty or
13 450 25
punishment is provided.
14 454 Non payment of adjudication penalty 59
Appointment of KMP/Service on foreign
15 383A,203 1
company
Total 1196
140
f. Further, inspite of such voluminous non compliances the

progress of the prosecution daring the last three years from
2015-16 to 2918-19 as indicated in table 6.4 page no. 70 of
the Annual Report, 2019 divulge various inactions and
omissions.
Progress of Prosecution during last three Years
Sl. no. Subject 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
1. Number of 2,308 1,764 958
companies
prosecuted
2. Number of 4,522 3,972 2,573
prosecutions
started during the
year.
3. Number of 46,979 48,987 44,278
Prosecutions
pending at the
beginning of the
year.
4. Number of 2,513 8,681 12,886
Prosecutions
disposed during the
year.
5. Convictions 828 572 680
6. Number of 75 110 105
Prosecutions
ending in
acquittals.
141
7. Number of 1,506 2,863 1,167

Prosecutions
disposed of
otherwise.
8. Number of 48,988 44,278 33,965
Prosecutions
pending at the end
of the year.
9. Total fine imposed 1,14,05,987 7,02,10,532 3,97,83,699
(In Rs.)
10. Total amount 77,69,837 1,05,30,205 82,98,352
awarded as cost to
Registrar (In Rs.)
11. Percentage of 32.94 6.58 5.27
conviction to total
cases decided.
12. Average number of 1.95 2.25 2.68
prosecutions per
company
prosecuted during
the year.
13. Average fine 13,775.34 1,22,745.68 58,505
imposed per case
ending in
conviction (In Rs.)
ROLE OF COMPANY SECRETARIES – BACKGROUND –

CURRENT LEGAL PROVISIONS- MASTER ROLE TO PLAY
IN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE – CORPORARTE
142
GOVERNANCE WARRIORS:
Company Secretary- A Catalyst to good governance.
 Good governance relates to systems of supervision, monitoring and
sharing of information with the stakeholders to generate confidence and
trust with the customers, suppliers, creditors and maximizing corporate
value for its shareholders. Although Corporate Governance varies
across countries, there is growing consensus about the need for four key
elements – transparency, fairness to all stakeholders, disclosures of all
the financial and non financial information in an easily understandable
manner and supervision of the company’s activities by professionally
competent and independent Board of Directors. To build the
confidence, it is desirable that some system be in place, firstly to ensure
due compliance of laws and secondly to bring transparency in
informing the shareholders and other stakeholders about how the
business is being managed.
 It is here that the company secretary, as an integrated manager, fills the
gap. He not only advises the Board on various compliance requirements
and co- ordinates and translates the policies of the Board into action,
but also communicates the same to stakeholders.
 The Company Secretary has all along been conceived as an extended
arm of the Government for the purpose of ensuring compliance of
various laws by the companies and is recognized under the MRTP Act,
Income Tax Act and various other statutes as the principal officer of the
company.
 In 1956, when the Companies Bill was led before the Parliament the
then Finance Minister Late Shri. D.C. Deshmukh had assured the
Parliament that the Companies Act would be amended in due course so
as to ensure that every company should have a qualified Company
Secretary analogue to the provision of the UK Companies Act. In 1970
when the system of managing agents and secretaries and treasurers was
143
abolished, the Government of India envisioned that the Company

secretaries would fill the bill.
 Indeed, Company Secretaries have been functioning in the corporate
sector long before the statutory requirement of compulsory requirement
of company secretary was introduced in the year 1975. In 1970,
recognizing the important role which the company secretaries played
for the proper working of the company, the Department of Company
Affairs had instructed all public sector undertakings to appoint qualified
secretaries.
 While moving the Company Secretaries Will, 1980 for consideration by
the Lok Sabha on 16th June 1980, the Minister of Law, Justice and
Company Affairs, Shri P Shivshankar had said “An essential ingredient
in the healthy growth of the corporate sector is the induction of
professional management. The Government attaches special
importance3 to the development of professional management, so that
the corporate sector can evolve and function in tune with the changing
needs of the times, and the social responsibilities that the important
segment of the economy has to shoulder. The profession of Company
Secretaries has an important part to play in the introduction of
professionalism in the area of the corporate management.
Core Competency of Company Secretaries:

 In UK, the Cadbury Committee in its report on the financial aspects of
Corporate Governance also recognized the importance of the role of the
Company Secretary and observed “ The Company Secretary has a key
role to play in ensuring that the board procures are both followed and
regularly reviewed . The Chairman and Board will look to the Company
Secretary for guidance on what their responsibilities are under the rules
and regulations to which they ate subject and on how these
responsibilities should be discharged.”
144
 The OECD Principles of Corporate Governance provide that the

Chairman of a company may be supported by the Company Secretary
and that the contributions of non- executive board members to the
company can be enhanced by providing access to certain key managers
within the company such as, the Company Secretary.
 A Company Secretary as competent professional comes in existence
after exhaustive exposure provided by the Institute through compulsory
coaching, rigorous training and continuing education programmes. The
member of the institute are not only conversant with the technicalities
and provisions of the corporate legal areas but are highly specialized
professionals in the matters of procedural and practical aspects involved
in the compliances enjoined under various statutes and the rules,
regulations, bye-laws and guidelines made there under. The detailed
syllabus for Company Secretaryship synthesizes corporate, taxation,
economic, financial, commercial, industrial and allied laws in additions
to the management, administration, finance and accounts. It is well
recognized that the corporate laws in the core area of specialization of
Company Secretaries. He is essentially a compliance man with
compliance bent of mind.
 Company Secretary being a key functionary in the corporate sector, his
role, functions and responsibilities have winded over the years. With
increasing emphasis on the principle of good governance and
introduction of various provisions in relation thereto, a Company
Secretary now has enhanced responsibility for safeguarding the interest
of the stakeholders.
 A Company Secretary deals with a wide spectrum of legislatures,
finance and management far transcending the provisions of the
Companies Act and most importantly acts as an agent ion behalf of the
Board. Raising of finance in India and abroad, dealing with deposits ,
inter corporate loans and investments, raising of funds from financial
145
institutions, joint ventures and foreign collaborations, corporate

restructuring, vetting of contracts, arbitration and other legal matters
which every company has to address, are being handled by the
professionally qualified Company Secretaries.
Section 383A (Certain Companies to have Secretaries) was inserted by Act
41 of 1974, Section 30, with effect from 01st February, 1975, stating that “
Every company {having such paid up share capital as may be prescribed}
shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary and where the Board of
Directors of any such company comprises only two directors, neither of
them shall be the secretary of the company.” The said prescribed capital
has changed from time to time and the paid up capital remains Rs 5 Crores
for appointment of Whole Time Company Secretary since 2009.
THE CURRENT PROVISIONS, ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF
THE COMPANY SECRETARIES PLAYING MASTER ROLE IN
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PROTECTING THE INTEREST OF
ALL STOCK HOLDERS.
1. That the Companies Act, 2013 has clearly based on the substantive
provisions that who will operate the company and have prescribed the
minimum number of persons for the administration of the company.
Sec 203 of the Companies Act, 2013 extracts presented herein below:
“203. Appointment of key managerial personnel
(1) Every company belonging to such class or classes of companies as
may be prescribed shall have the following whole-time key managerial
personnel,—
(i) Managing director, or Chief Executive Officer or manager and in
their absence, a whole-time director;
(ii) Company secretary; and
(iii) Chief Financial Officer……..
(2) Every whole-time key managerial personnel of a company shall be
appointed by means of a resolution of the Board containing the terms
146
and conditions of the appointment including the remuneration.

(3) A whole-time key managerial personnel shall not hold office in
more than one company except in its subsidiary company at the same
time:
Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall disentitle a key
managerial personnel from being a director of any company with the
permission of the Board:
Provided further that whole-time key managerial personnel holding
office in more than one company at the same time on the date of
commencement of this Act, shall, within a period of six months from
such commencement, choose one company, in which he wishes to
continue to hold the office of key managerial personnel:
Provided also that a company may appoint or employ a person as its
managing director, if he is the managing director or manager of one,
and of not more than one, other company and such appointment or
employment is made or approved by a resolution passed at a meeting of
the Board with the consent of all the directors present at the meeting
and of which meeting, and of the resolution to be moved thereat,
specific notice has been given to all the Directors then in India.
(4) If the office of any whole-time key managerial personnel is vacated,
the resulting vacancy shall be filled-up by the Board at a meeting of the
Board within a period of six months from the date of such vacancy.
(5) If a company contravenes the provisions of this section, the
company shall be punishable with fine which shall not be less than one
lakh rupees but which may extend to five lakh rupees and every director
and key managerial personnel of the company who is in default shall be
punishable with fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees and
where the contravention is a continuing one, with a further fine which
may extend to one thousand rupees for every day after the first during
which the contravention continues.
147
2. Section 205 of the Companies Act, 2013 has described the functions of
a Company Secretary:
“205. Functions of company secretary
(1) The functions of the company secretary shall include,—
(a) To report to the Board about compliance with the provisions of this
Act, the rules made there under and other laws applicable to the
company;
(b) To ensure that the company complies with the applicable secretarial
standards;
(c) To discharge such other duties as may be prescribed.
Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, the expression
“secretarial standards” means secretarial standards issued by the
Institute of Company Secretaries of India constituted under section 3 of
the Company Secretaries Act, 1980 and approved by the Central
Government.
(2) The provisions contained in section 204 and section 205 shall not
affect the duties and functions of the Board of Directors, chairperson of
the company, managing director or whole-time director under this Act,
or any other law for the time being in force.
3. Further, Sec. 2 (51), has defined key managerial persons in relation of a
company as under:
Sec 2 (51) “key managerial personnel”, in relation to a company,
means—
(i) The Chief Executive Officer or the managing director or the
manager;
(ii) The company secretary;
(iii) The whole-time director;
(iv) The Chief Financial Officer; and
(v) Such other officer as may be prescribed;
148
4. Further Sec 2(59) & 2 (60) has defined Officer and Officer who is in
Default respectively as under:

2(59) “officer” includes any director, manager or key managerial
personnel or any person in accordance with whose directions or
instructions the Board of Directors or any one or more of the directors
is or are accustomed to act;
2(60) “officer who is in default”, for the purpose of any provision in
this Act which enacts that an officer of the company who is in default
shall be liable to any penalty or punishment by way of imprisonment,
fine or otherwise, means any of the following officers of a company,
namely:—
(i) whole-time director;
(ii) Key managerial personnel;
(iii) Where there is no a key managerial personnel, such director or
directors as specified by the Board in this behalf and who has or have
given his or their consent in writing to the Board to such specification,
or all the directors, if no director is so specified;
(iv) any person who, under the immediate authority of the Board or any
key managerial personnel, is charged with any responsibility including
maintenance, filing or distribution of accounts or records, authorizes,
actively participates in, knowingly permits, or knowingly fails to take
active steps to prevent, any default;
(v) Any person in accordance with whose advice, directions or
instructions the Board of Directors of the company is accustomed to
act, other than a person who gives advice to the Board in a professional
capacity;
(vi) Every director, in respect of a contravention of any of the
provisions of this Act, who is aware of such contravention by virtue of
the receipt by him of any proceedings of the Board or participation in
such proceedings without objecting to the same, or where such
149
contravention had taken place with his consent or connivance;

(vii) In respect of the issue or transfer of any shares of a company, the
share transfer agents, registrars and merchant bankers to the issue or
transfer;
5. Further 2 (24) of the Companies Act, 2013 has defined Company
Secretary Or Secretary as under:

“company secretary” or “secretary” means a company secretary as
defined in clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Company
Secretaries Act, 1980 who is appointed by a company to perform the
functions of a company secretary under this Act;
6. Further Rule 8 and Rule 8A OF the Companies (Appointment and
Remuneration of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 states as under:

(Rule 8) Appointment of Key Managerial Personnel.- Every listed
company and every other public company having a paid-up share
capital of ten crore rupees or more shall have whole-time key
managerial personnel.
Further Rule 8 A was inserted with effect from 9th June, 2014 as under:
Rule 8 A -- Appointment of Companies Secretaries in Companies not
covered Under Rule 8—A company other than a company covered
under Rule 8 which has a paid up capital of five crore rupees or ,one
shall have a whole time company secretary.
Rule 10. Duties of Company Secretary.-
The duties of Company Secretary shall also discharge, the following duties,
namely:-
(1) To provide to the directors of the company, collectively and individually,
such guidance as they may require, with regard to their duties,
responsibilities and powers;
(2) To facilitate the convening of meetings and attend Board, committee and
general meetings and maintain the minutes of these meetings;
(3) To obtain approvals from the Board, general meeting, the government
150
and such other authorities as required under the provisions of the Act;
(4) To represent before various regulators, and other authorities under the
Act in connection with discharge of various duties under the Act;
(5) To assist the Board in the conduct of the affairs of the company;
(6) To assist and advise the Board in ensuring good Corporate Governance
and in complying with the Corporate Governance requirements and best
practices; and
(7) To discharge such other duties as have been specified under the Act or
rules; and
(8) Such other duties as may be assigned by the Board from time to time.
CRITERIA WHEN SERVICES OF CS & PCS ARE REQUIRED BASED ON
LIMITS:
Certification of Annual Return by a a) All LISTED Companies

Company Secretary in practice.
b) Every Company having;
As per Provisions of • Paid-Up share capital of 10 Crore (Ten
Section 92 of Crore) rupees or more or
Companies Act, 2013 • Turnover of 50 Crore (fifty Crore) rupees or
read with sub rule 2 of more
Rule 11 Chapter VII,
Companies
(Management and
Administration) Rules,
2014.
151
Signing of Annual Return by a a) All LISTED a) One Person

Company Secretary in practice. Companies Company
As per Provisions of Section 92 of b) All PUBLIC b) Small company

Companies Act, 2013 read with sub Companies
rule 2 of Rule 11 Chapter VII, c) private company
Companies c) Private Limited (if such private
(Management and Administration) Company having: company is a startup)
Rules, 2014. • Paid up share (These are the
Capital Exceeding companies
50 lac; or exempted from
• Turnover signing of Annual
exceeding 2 Crore Return by Company
Secretary.)
Companies which shall appoint a) All LISTED Companies

Company Secretary
b) Every other company having a paid-up
As per Provisions of Section 203 of share
Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule capital of Rs. 5 Crore (Five crore rupees) or
8A more:
Chapter XIII, Companies
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014.
152
Secretarial Audit a) All Listed Companies
As per Provisions of sub section ‘1’ of b) Every Public Company having;

Section 204 of Companies Act, 2013: • Paid-Up Share Capital of Rs. 50 Crore (fifty
As per Provisions of Section 204 of crore rupees) or more; or
Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 9 • Every Public Company having a Turnover of
Chapter XIII, Companies Rs.250 Crore (two hundred fifty crore rupees)
(Appointment and Remuneration of or More
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014.
Key Managerial a) All Listed Companies

Personnel
b) Every Public Company having Paid-Up
As per Provisions of Section 203 of Share Capital of Rs. 10 Crore (Five crore
Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 8 rupees) or more.
Chapter XIII, Companies
(Appointment and Remuneration of c) *Every Private Limited Company having
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014: Paid- Up Share Capital of Rs. 5 Crore (five
crore rupees) or more required to appoint
Company Secretary and designate as Key
Managerial Personnel. (The new notification
has increased the paid up capital limit of Rs.
10 Crores- The applcant has challenged the
new notification to get it set aside and stay
immediately and to prevail the earlier Rule 8A
which says that all the companies whose paid
up capitals are above Rs 5 Crores should have
a mandatory Whole Time Company Secretary.
INFLOW OF NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE INSTITUTE

153
OF COMPANY SECRETARIES OF INDIA FOR CARING

THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND THE NUMBER OF
COMPANIES BEING INCORPORATED YEAR WISE.
From the above said table taking the average of seven
years(considering 2019 as a full year, only for calculation) the
average company secretaries/ member coming into the market is
approx 4077 members per year. If we take the registration of the
company from year 2011-12 to 2018-19 the average company of
incorporation of last eight years comes around 95,857 companies
per year. The table is presented herewith for immediate
reference.
ITEM TOTAL NO. OF INCREASE
As on 31.12.2019 60,628 3,082
As on 31.03.2019 57,546 3,161
As on 31.03.2018 54385 4188
As on 31.03.2017 50197 6237
As on 31.03.2016 43960 5222
As on 31.03.2015 38738 3580
As on 31.03.2014 35158 3070
Table 3.4 Registration of Companies Limited by Shares during Financial Year

2011-12 to 2018-19
(Rs. in
crore)
Private Public Total
Financial
No. of Authorized No. of Authorized No. of Authorized
Year
Companies Capital Companies Capital Companies Capital
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2011-12 96,159 23,217.96 3,480 11,600.38 99,639 34,818.34
154
2012-13 88,998 31,418.13 3,385 26,118.48 92,383 57,536.61

2013-14 94,924 19,698.03 3,105 19,174.09 98,029 38,872.12
2014-15 62,643 8,868.53 1,466 22,953.84 64,109 31,822.37
2015-16 82,318 12,769.70 1,766 30,296.32 84,084 43,066.02
2016-17 95,328 16,596.52 2,113 14,660.26 97,441 31,256.78
2017-18 105,781 47,988.16 1,918 55,197.19 107,699 103,185.35
2018-19 120,692 63,979.41 2,784 20,071.35 123,476 84,050.76
It should further be noted that the paid up capital of the company

always cannot represent the performance, profile and large activity of
business. Company even with less paid up capital can have large
economic activity and turnover. The ICSI has rightly suggested and
made the representations before the MCA for adding the criteria of
turnover and net worth in addition to the paid up capital. For immediate
reference and understanding the applcant is presenting herewith the
name of the few corporate entities having large economic activities/
turnover with minimum paid up capital.
The entire communication on the said notification has
been duly covered in the List of Dates and Events with the vital
facts thereof as under:
LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
Letter/ Dates/ Particulars/ Remarks
Year
29.08.2013 Companies Act, 2013 was introduced
replacing Companies Act, 1956 with the
objective of self governance, transparency and
stringent provisions against the defaulters non
complying the Act. Further containing the
provisions of appointment of whole time
155
company secretary in prescribed company

U/Sec 203 of the Companies Act, 2013.
31.03.2014 That the MCA has notified Companies
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014 stating that
every listed company and every other public
company having a paid share capital of Rs 10
Crore or more shall have a whole time key
managerial personnel including whole time
company secretary.
09.06.2014 Immediately it was realized that all the private
companies has got out of the appointment of
the whole time company secretary which was
there since 1975. Once it was realized and
pointed out by the stake holders immediately
the notification dated 09.06.2014 has come
inserting Rule 8A in the above Companies
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014, stating
that “A company other than a company
covered under Rule 8 which has a paid up
capital of Rs 5 Crore or more shall have a
whole time company secretary.
FY 2017-18 Ministry has decided to removal of name of
companies from the Registrar of Companies
(ROC) and 2,34, 357 companies were closed
during the FY 2017-18, totaling to the paid up
capital of Rs 14,593.95 Crores. As these
companies were falling in the categories of
156
continued non compliances even non filing of

annual accounts and annual returns.
FY 2018-19 Similarly in the FY 2018-19, 1,38,432
companies were struck off with the total paid
up capital of Rs 12,753.19 Crores due to
continued non compliance and the Ministry
actions thereof.
30.11.2018 There were 33 Lakhs DINs (Director
Identification Number) in the registry and
around 15.88 Lakhs DIN holders have filed
DIR KYC as on 30.11.2018 (48.121%
Directors remained non complied inviting
questions on their sanctity, existence, and
traceability). in the drive by MCA managed to
feed only 11 Lakhs Aadhar Card holders. The
non compliances, non traceability, fake,
fabricated, benamies, dummy companies and
directors has become grave concerns being
utilized for malicious illegal economic
activities and white collar crimes.
31.03.2019 As per the annual report of MCA (Ministry of
Corporate Affairs) out of total 18,73,044
companies, 6,70,018 companies were closed
[35.77% (more than one third) of the total
companies] were closed due to non
compliances/ serious governance issues and
only 11,56,374 companies were ACTIVE
companies as on 31.03.2019. The Ministry has
decided to weed out inactive companies and
157
disqualified directors, protect the public

money, overcome the financial irregularities
and increase the effectiveness of the
governance mechanism.
25.04.2019 The ministry has issued notification dated
21.02.2019 for filing of FORM ACTIVE
(Active Company Tagging Identities and
Verification) on or before 25.04.2019. This
Form was prepared by the ministry with
exhaustive research getting the whereabouts of
the companies registered office, KMPs, all
statutory officials, auditors, cost auditors,
M.D., company secretaries e.t.c. and it was
carrying the stringent conditions for
compliances and it was too difficult to
continue the non compliances. Beside several
critical informations controlling the company
it was asking the complete PAN and
membership number of the whole time
company secretary of the company. These
stringent provisions have created great barrier
in continued non compliances/non-
governance.
15.06.2019 The said notification for filing of INC 22A
FORM ACTIVE was further extended to
15.06.2019 without any additional fee and
thereafter with additional fee of Rs 10,000/-
vide notification dated 25.04.2019.
17.06.2019 Ministry has issued letter dated 17.06.2019 to
158
ICSI (Institute of Company Secretaries of

India- A statutory body under the Company
Secretaries Act, 1980- Monitoring the
profession of company secretaries and
Corporate Governance), forwarding the
different letters dated 04.04.2019, 09.04.2019,
undated letters and emails of 16 individual,
firms and companies raising their different
concerns before the ministry including
grievances of few one about not able to attract
company secretary due to high salary,
affording salary of company secretary,
exemption for private companies with less
turn over, non availability if company
secretaries. Out of the above said16
grievances, 6 grievances were pertaining to
non availability of the company secretary in
the market. The roving grievances were raised
without any base to evade the compliance of
the appointment of company secretaries.
08.07.2019 The ICSI has addressed individually all the
grievances of the stake holders and have
stated that keeping in mind the present
parameters for appointment of company
secretary which are framed by MCA after a lot
of public debate and deliberations are
absolutely aligned with the present
requirements; and therefore, need to be kept
intact. Needless to mention that the level of
159
compliance as envisaged by the Government

is rising day by day. It was specifically stated
“That, out of total active companies, i.e.
approximately, 11 Lakh companies, only
39,805 companies are required to appoint a
whole time company secretary. We wish to
submit that as on 01st July, 2019, ICSI has
58,690 company secretaries on its register out
of which only 10,644 are in practice.
Accordingly, sufficient numbers of company
secretaries are available to serve the corporate
India. Further, ICSI through its dedicated
placement cell provides placement services to
corporate to meet the demand and supply of
the company secretaries across the country.
09.07.2019 The ministry has further forwarded letter dated
09.07.2019 containing 18 more grievances
sent by different stake holders for the
comments of the ICSI. Out of the 18
grievances 12 were not related to appointment
of company secretaries and it was pertaining
to other concerns. Further, out of 18, 4 have
raised the grievances that they are not able to
find a company secretary or there is a deficit
of members in the market. These allegations
were completely bogus and it has been raised
ulterior motives to continue the non
compliances of the express provisions of law.
160
25.07.2019 The ICSI has addressed and made its

comments individually on all the grievances of
the stake holders and reiterated that “We, once
again, reiterate that the present parameters for
framed by the MCA after a lot of public
the Government is rising day by day.
We Shall be pleased to provide any further
information or clarification in this regard on
03.01.2020 The MCA has issued the notification dated
03.01.2020 stating that “Every private
company which has a paid up share capital of
Rs 10 Crores or more shall have a whole time
company secretary. The consequence thereof,
all the public and private company having the
paid up capital of less than Rs 10 Crores were
totally exempted from the appointment of
whole time company secretary. As per the
report dated 01.01.2015 containing the data as
on 31.12.2014, there were 11,532 companies
having the paid up capital of Rs 83,376.46
Crores under the bracket of paid up capital of
above Rs 5 Crores to Rs 10 Crores. Hence, a
big question mark has come on the
161
employment of approximately more than

11,000 company secretaries, great
compromise with the Corporate Governance
of these companies and have made the impact
on 3.5 Lakhs students on the roll of the ICSI,
who is seeing their future in the field of
Corporate Governance and company
secretaries and hence the protest has started
across the country.
08.01.2020 As the capital limit has increased inspite of the
comments and efforts of the ICSI and the
members has started questioning the role and
responsibilities of the institute and its council
members, it has issued a letter to the members
stating that “It was because of your institutes
continuous involvements and representations,
the enhancements in limits has been limited to
Rs 10 Crores only and not beyond.” Further, it
was also stated that ICSI is committed provide
whole hearted support to its members and
students and will take all necessary measures
as may be required. It has also appealed to the
members and students “We earnestly appeal
all our members and students not to post any
derogatory or defamatory remarks against the
regulators, stakeholders or Institute on the
social media or by any other means, keeping
in view its far reaching impact on the
credibility of the profession.” That the
162
Institute has threatened the members and the

students from making the protests and
questioning the failure of the ICSI and its
councils and have restricted the freedom of
speech and expression. The ICSI and the
council has also threatened the members for
the disciplinary proceedings.
09.01.2020 The ICSI has again issued the advisory to all
the regional council members, chapters and
others stating that “It is advised to refrain from
making any derogatory or defamatory
comment against the MCA or the ICSI.
Further you are advised from refrain the
facilitating the demonstration by the members
and the students. Also the regional councils/
Chapters/ Units are advised not to make any
representation in this regard at their end
directly to any authority /forum, as the
institute has already in process of once again
taking up the matter with the MCA. So by
these advisory again the members were
restricted from raising the voice on the said
change and protest thereof.
10.01.2020 The ICSI has written the letter to the MCA
stating that the said “Amendment has caused a
students and there has been lots of resentment
in the fraternity across the country.” The ICSI
has requested for further amendment in to the
163
rule taking into account the following

suggestions:
SUGGESTION -1:
Every company which has a paid up share
capital of more than Rs 5 Crores and up to Rs
10 Crores and
a. Turnover of hundred Crores rupees or more;
or
b. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks
crores rupees or more;
Explanation- For the purpose of this sub rule,
account.
more;
b. Turnover of one hundred crores rupees or
more; or
c. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks
crores rupees or more.;
Explanation:- For the purpose of this sub rule,
164

account.
11.01.2020 That the applcant not being satisfied by the
reasoning and the submissions of the institute
and its officials have requested for open house
sessions or presentation before the Council for
the strong submission before the Ministry.
Copy of the said letter dated 11th January,
2020 is enclosed herewith and marked as
Annexure- 7. However, the said letter remain
un responded from the ICSI.
03.02.2020 However, the ICSI have re approached for the
further amendment in the rule vide letter dated
03rd February, 2020 (Copy of the same is
enclosed and marked herewith as Annexure –
8) with the prayer that to kindly consider
further amendment in Rule 8A of the
Companies (Appointment and Remuneration
of Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2013, taking
into consideration inserting the following in
place of the existing provision:
a. A paid up share capital of ten
crores rupees or more; or
b. Net worth of one hundred crores
rupees or more; or
165
c. Outstanding loans or borrowings

from banks or public financial
institutions of one hundred crores
rupees or more; or
d. Turnover of two hundred fifty
crore rupees or more
paid up share capital, net worth, outstanding
loans or borrowings or turnover as the case
may be existing on the last date of latest
account.
Every company which ceases to be a company
covered under Rule 8A for three consecutive
financial years shall not be required to appoint
company secretary till such time it meets the
criteria specified in Rule 8A.
(i) Further, the applicant is being aggrieved by the

serious compromise with the Corporate Governance
and with the analytical data of continued non
compliances, no whereabouts of more than one third
of the companies which has got closed and even the
various listed companies have vanished. As a
common citizen of this country without any personal
interest for the betterment of the common citizen of
this country to get ensure the Corporate Governance
in the interest of this Nation the urgent directions
needed for the Corporate Governance of the
166
companies registered with Ministry of Corporate

Affairs. The applicant has raised the issue of better
Corporate Governance before the ICSI and the ICSI
have also made several representations against the
recent notification dated 03.01.2020 with effect
from 01.04.2020 and severe protest has taken place
and resentment of the members. The applcant has
covered all the aspects in the synopsis and List of
dated and events.
(ii) The applicant by profession is a Company Secretary
and is concerned with the outcome and impact of the
amended Rule 8A of the Act and subsequently filed
present representation. The applicant is working in
private sector at a position of Executive Vice
President, Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary
and his this representation and initiatives is self
driven in the interest of the Company Secretaries,
common people and in the interest of the Nation.
(iii) That the MCA on 09.06.2014 notified the
Managerial Personnel) 2014 with Rule 8A wherein
the Appointment of Company Secretaries in
companies not covered Under Rule 8. A company
other than a company covered under Rule 8 which
has a paid-up capital of five Crore rupees or more,
shall have a whole-time company secretary.
(Notified on 09.06.2014).
(iv) The ministry has issued notification dated
21.02.2019 for filing of FORM ACTIVE (Active
Company Tagging Identities and Verification) on
167
or before 25.04.2019. This Form was prepared by

the ministry with exhaustive research getting the
whereabouts of the companies registered office,
KMPs, all statutory officials, auditors, cost
auditors, M.D., company secretaries e.t.c. and it
was carrying the stringent conditions for
compliances and it was too difficult to continue the
non compliances. Beside several critical
informations controlling the company it was asking
the complete PAN and membership number of the
whole time company secretary of the company.
These stringent provisions have created great
barrier in continued non compliances/non-
governance.
(v) The said notification for filing of INC 22A FORM
ACTIVE was further extended to 15.06.2019
without any additional fee and thereafter with
additional fee of Rs 10,000/- vide notification
dated 25.04.2019.
(vi) Ministry has issued letter dated 17.06.2019 to ICSI
(Institute of Company Secretaries of India- A
statutory body under the Company Secretaries Act,
1980- Monitoring the profession of company
secretaries and Corporate Governance), forwarding
the different letters dated 04.04.2019, 09.04.2019,
undated letters and emails of 16 individual, firms
and companies raising their different concerns
before the ministry including grievances of few one
about not able to attract company secretary due to
high salary, affording salary of company secretary,
168
exemption for private companies with less turn

over, non availability if company secretaries. Out
of the above said16 grievances, 6 grievances were
pertaining to non availability of the company
secretary in the market. The roving grievances
were raised without any base to evade the
compliance of the appointment of company
secretaries.
(vii) The ICSI has addressed individually all the
grievances of the stake holders and have stated
that “In view of the aforesaid, keeping in mind the
present parameters for appointment of company
secretary which are framed by MCA after a lot of
public debate and deliberations are absolutely
aligned with the present requirements; and
therefore, need to be kept intact. Needless to
mention that the level of compliance as envisaged
by the Government is rising day by day.” It was
specifically stated “That, out of total active
companies, i.e. approximately, 11 Lakh companies,
only 39,805 companies are required to appoint a
whole time company secretary. We wish to submit
that as on 01st July, 2019, ICSI has 58,690
company secretaries on its register out of which
only 10,644 are in practice. Accordingly, sufficient
numbers of company secretaries are available to
serve the corporate India. Further, ICSI through its
dedicated placement cell provides placement
services to corporate to meet the demand and
supply of the company secretaries across the
169
country.
(viii) The ministry has further forwarded letter dated
09.07.2019 containing 18 more grievances sent by
different stake holders for the comments of the
ICSI. Out of the 18 grievances 12 were not related
to appointment of company secretaries and it was
pertaining to other concerns. Further, out of 18, 4
have raised the grievances that they are not able to
find a company secretary or there is a deficit of
members in the market. These allegations were
completely bogus and it has been raised ulterior
motives to continue the non compliances of the
express provisions of law.
(ix) The ICSI has addressed and made its comments
individually on all the grievances of the stake
holders and reiterated that “We, once again,
reiterate that the present parameters for
framed by the MCA after a lot of public debate and
deliberations are absolutely aligned with the
present requirements; and therefore, need to be
kept intact. Needless to mention that the level of
compliance as envisaged by the Government is
rising day by day.
(x) That M.C.A. amended the Rule 8A of the
Managerial Personnel) 2014 in a hasty manner
without considering the suggestions and
recommendations sent by the statuary body i.e.
170
ICSI, without estimating the outbreak and

consequences of the amendment over members
Institute of Companies Secretary and Corporate
Governance. The material available on record
prima-facie shows that amendment passed in a
hasty manner compromising the necessary checks
and balances
(xi) The MCA has issued the notification dated
03.01.2020 stating that “Every private company
which has a paid up share capital of Rs 10 Crores
or more shall have a whole time company
secretary. The consequence thereof, all the public
and private company having the paid up capital of
less than Rs 10 Crores were totally exempted from
the appointment of whole time company secretary.
As per the report dated 01.01.2015 containing the
data as on 31.12.2014, there were 11,532
companies having the paid up capital of Rs
83,376.46 Crores under the bracket of paid up
capital of above Rs 5 Crores to Rs 10 Crores.
Hence, a big question mark has come on the
Corporate Governance of these companies.
(xii) As the capital limit has increased inspite of the
comments and efforts of the ICSI and the members
has started questioning the role and responsibilities
of the institute and its council members, it has
issued a letter to the members stating that “It was
because of your institutes continuous involvements
and representations, the enhancements in limits has
been limited to Rs 10 Crores only and not beyond.”
171
Further, it was also stated that ICSI is committed

provide whole hearted support to its members and
students and will take all necessary measures as
may be required. It has also appealed to the
members and students “We earnestly appeal all our
members and students not to post any derogatory
or defamatory remarks against the regulators,
stakeholders or Institute on the social media or by
any other means, keeping in view its far reaching
impact on the credibility of the profession.” That
the Institute has threatened the members and the
students from making the protests and questioning
the failure of the ICSI and its councils and have
restricted the freedom of speech and expression.
(xiii) The ICSI has again issued the advisory to all the
regional council members, chapters and others
stating that “It is advised to refrain from making
any derogatory or defamatory comment against the
MCA or the ICSI. Further you are advised from
refrain the facilitating the demonstration by the
members and the students. Also the regional
councils/ Chapters/ Units are advised not to make
any representation in this regard at their end
directly to any authority /forum, as the institute has
already in process of once again taking up the
matter with the MCA. So by these advisory again
the members were restricted from raising the voice
on the said change and protest thereof.
(xiv) That ICSI being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
amendment of Rule 8A sent a representation with
172
it’s suggestions vide its letter dated 10.01.2020 and

concluded by stating that “….the companies have
proper and significant business operations which
triggers compliance with various laws. In absence
of services of Whole Time Company Secretaries,
these active companies may be exposed to greater
regulatory risk and non-compliance. Further in
such companies, public interest is also involved
and following good governance practices becomes
more significant….”.
(xv) The ICSI has written the letter to the MCA stating
that the said “Amendment has caused a
students and there has been lots of resentment in
the fraternity across the country.” The ICSI has
requested for further amendment in to the rule
taking into account the following suggestions:
SUGGESTION -1:
Every company which has a paid up share capital of more
than Rs 5 Crores and up to Rs 10 Crores and
b. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or public
financial institutions of one hundred crores rupees or
more;
Explanation- For the purpose of this sub rule, the
paid up share capital, turnover, or outstanding loans or
borrowings as the case may be, existing on the last date of
latest audited financial statement may be taken into
account.
173

c. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks or public
financial institutions of one hundred crores rupees or
more.
d. Shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary
Explanation:- For the purpose of this sub rule, the paid up
share capital, turnover, or outstanding loans or
borrowings as the case may be, existing on the last date
of latest audited financial statement may be taken into
account.
That the applicant not being satisfied by the reasoning
and the submissions of the institute and its officials have
requested for open house sessions or presentation before
the Council for the strong submission before the Ministry.
However, the said letter remains un-responded from the
ICSI.
(xvi) However, the ICSI have re approached for the
further amendment in the rule vide letter dated 03rd
February, 2020 with the prayer that to kindly consider
further amendment in Rule 8A of the Companies
Personnel) Rules, 2013, taking into consideration
inserting the following in place of the existing
provision:
more; or
174
b. Net worth of one hundred crores rupees or more; or

rupees or more; or
d. Turnover of two hundred fifty crore rupees or more
Explanation:- For the purpose of this rule, the paid up
share capital, net worth, outstanding loans or
borrowings or turnover as the case may be existing on
the last date of latest audited financial statement may
be taken into account.
Every company which ceases to be a company covered
under Rule 8A for three consecutive financial years shall
not be required to appoint company secretary till such time
it meets the criteria specified in Rule 8A.
(xvii) That impact of impugned notification can also be
seen by the act of one of the defaulter company
who sent grievance to the MCA. i.e. M/s. Kaytee
Corp. Pvt Ltd. who for the first time since 2013
appointed a C.S. on 10.06.2019 and subsequently
removed. The MCA current status shows CS
resigned on 01.02.2020 as per the Form DIR 12. It
is pertinent to say that unlike this entity all other
entity having paid up capital between 5 cr. to 10 cr.
will also remove already appointed C.S.
(xviii) That in view of the above facts and circumstances
the said Notification is bad in law with
Constitutional vires. There is manifest arbitrariness
in the said Notification
In the light of the above your good self is requested to consider
175
the relief as sought for in the present representation including

withdrawal of the said notification dated 03.01.2020 of the
Ministry of Corporate Affairs which is effective from 01.04.2020
and to continue with the earlier Rule 8A. Further, no exemptions
should be granted on the basis of paid-up capital or the size of the
company compromising with the corporate governance and the
compliance of the Companies Act, 2013 and the other corporate
laws should be ensured. That a robust corporate governance
mechanism should be developed to ensure compliances by the
corporate entities and the effective actions against the defaulters
in the interest of the common public and in the interest of the
Nation.
Thanking You,
Yours Truly,
Suman Kumar
FCS- 5824
22/11, Second Floor (Back Side),
West Patel Nagar, New Delhi – 110008.
Email Id: [email protected]
Mob: 9958299558.
TRUE COPY
176

IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING THE

NOTORIZED AFFIDAVIT.
TO,
& THE COMPANION JUSTICES
NAMED PETITIONERS
1. The Petitioner/Applicant herein is filing the present Petition (PIL)

under Article 32 of the Constitution of India to challenge the
Constitutional vires of rule 8A of the Notification as being in
violation of Article(s)14, 19(1)g and 21 of the Constitution.
2. That in the accompanying Writ Petition the petitioner/ Applicant

have already set out in detail the facts and circumstances leading
up to the filing of the instant PIL petition. In order to avoid
repetition and for the sake of brevity, the petitioner seek
indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to permit them to refer and rely
upon the same at the time of hearing of the instant application.
177
3. That in the present pandemic situation and due to Lockdown

throughout the Country the petitioner could not get the affidavit in
support of the Writ Petition attested by a Notary Public hence
seeks exemption from filing the notarized affidavit in support of
the PIL petition. The petitioner further assures that when the
lockdown is revoked and the situation becomes normal the
petitioner will file the notorised affidavit in support of the PIL
Petition.
4. That under such circumstances this application be allowed,

otherwise grave prejudice will be caused to the petitioners.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court

may graciously be pleased to:
a. Allow this application and exempt the applicant/ petitioner

from filing the notarized affidavit in support of the PIL
Petition; And /or
b. Pass any other or further orders as may be deemed fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of this case
Filed By:
Pranab Prakash
Advocate for Petitioners
Drawn by: Shashank Deo Sudhi, Advocate
Drawn on : 17.07.2020
Filed On: 17.07.2020
178

IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
APPLICATION FOR STAY.
TO,
& THE COMPANION JUSTICES
NAMED PETITIONERS
1. The Petitioner/Applicant herein is filing the present Petition

(PIL) under Article 32 of the Constitution of India to
challenge the Constitutional vires of rule 8A of the
Notification as being in violation of Article(s)14, 19(1)g and
21 of the Constitution.
2. That in the accompanying Writ Petition the petitioner/

Applicant have already set out in detail the facts and
circumstances leading up to the filing of the instant PIL
petition. In order to avoid repetition and for the sake of
brevity, the petitioner seek indulgence of this Hon’ble Court
to permit them to refer and rely upon the same at the time of
hearing of the instant application.
179
3. The Fundamental Rights of the Petitioner/Applicant herein

has been violated under Art. (s) 14 and 21 of the Constitution
since he now is a class within a class as a result of the said
Notification, which is unconstitutional and his right will be
affected.
4. That the Notification is bad in law, it has been clarified that the
amendment introduced therein suffer from manifest
arbitrariness.
5. That the present Notification violates Art14 of the

Constitution in as much as that it attempts to create a “class
within a class”.
6. That from the very face of it, the Notification is

unconstitutional, capricious, and arbitrary. Further, if the
Notification is brought into operation, it would severely
hamper public money at large.
7. That not staying the present Notification would severely

hamper the economy and the Company Secretaries.
8. That the Petitioner/Applicant herein has a strong case on

merits and same ought not to be defeated by continued
operation of the Notification.
9. That the balance of convenience lies in favour of the

Petitioner/Applicant herein.
10. That granting of stay would benefit Company Secretaries

already engaged within Companies having paid up capital
more than 5 Crore rupees, but not granting the stay would
not affect the Respondents in anyway.
180
PRAYER
IN LIGHT OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE HEREINABOVE

IN THE APPLICATION, IT IS PRAYED THAT THIS
HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:
(a) Grant ex-parte and ad-interim stay against the notification

dated 03.01.2020 of Respondent N0.1 from the operation of
Rule 8A of Companies (Appointment and Remuneration Of
Managerial Personnel) Rules, 2014; and/or
(b) Pass any other order (s) and direction (s) that this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.

Filed By:
Pranab Prakash
Advocate for Petitioners
Drawn by: Shashank Deo Sudhi, Advocate
Drawn on : 17.07.2020
Filed On: 17.07.2020
THE SUPREME COURT OF !NIDA
WP (PIL) NO. _ OF 2020.
IN THE MATTER OF:

SUMANKUMAR ... PETITIONER
VERSU S
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... RESPONDENTS
VAKALA TNAMA
I, Suman Kumar, aged about 45 years, S/o Late Sh. Arjun Prasad Singh,
R/o 22/11, Second Floor, Near Patel Park, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi-I 10008, do
hereby appoint and retain and Advocates of Supreme Court of India to act and
appear for me in the above Petition on my behalf to conduct and prosecute (or defend)
or withdraw the same and all proceedings that may be taken in respect of any
application connected with the same or any decree or order passed therein, including
proceedings in taxation and application for Review, to file and obtain return of
documents and to deposit and receive money on my behalf in the said Petition and
in application for Review and to represent me and to take all necessary steps on
my/our behalf in the above matter. I agree to ratify all acts done by the aforesaid
Advocate_ in pursuance of this Authority.
Dated this the day of July 2020. =-::'cc'.'.·· ==�
�· :Ji
= -�t. �...,.=-��_.,. .>
PETITIONER
Accepted, Identified & Certified
PRAKASH Digitally signed by
PRAKASH PRANAB
PRANAB Date: 2020.07.16 20:30:25

+05'30'
[Pranab Prakash]
Advocate-on-record
Advocate for the Petitioners
Chamber 20-A (R.K Garg Block)
Supreme Court of India
Code No. 2660
MEMO OF APPEARANCE
To,
The Registrar,
Supreme Court of India,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)/

Respondent(s)/ Caveator/Opposite Parties/intervenor in the matter mentioned.
Yours faithfully,
PRAKASH PRANAB Digitally signed by PRAKASH PRANAB
[Pranab Prakash]
Date: 2020.07.16 20:31:08 +05'30'
Advocate-on-record
Advocate for the Petitioner
Chamber 20-A (R.K Garg Block)
Supreme Court of India
Code No.2660
Date: 17.07.2020

Advocate'S Check List (To Be Certified by Advocate-On-Record)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advocate'S Check List (To Be Certified by Advocate-On-Record)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advocate'S Check List (To Be Certified by Advocate-On-Record)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADVOCATE’S CHECK LIST

(TO BE CERTIFIED BY ADVOCATE-ON-RECORD)

[FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE]

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER: PRANAB PRAKASH

(b) Similar Pending matter with No Similar Pending matter

That this public interest litigation is being preferred on

That the petitioner is a public spirited citizen of India and

The petitioner is related to many philanthropic acts and

That the Petitioner is a fellow member of Company

That it is submitted that the petitioner is having deep

Hence, this writ petition.

LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS

Letter/ Particulars/ Remarks

29.08.2013 Companies Act, 2013 was introduced

31.03.2014 That the MCA has notified Companies

managerial personnel including whole time

09.06.2014 Immediately it was realized that all the private

FY 2017-18 Ministry has decided to removal of name of

FY 2018-19 Similarly in the FY 2018-19, 1,38,432

continued non-compliance and the Ministry

30.11.2018 There were 33 Lakhs DINs (Director

31.03.2019 As per the annual report of MCA (Ministry of

and increase the effectiveness of the

25.04.2019 The ministry has issued notification dated

15.06.2019 The said notification for filing of INC 22A

17.06.2019 Ministry has issued letter dated 17.06.2019 to

08.07.2019 The ICSI has addressed individually all the

with the present requirements; and therefore,

09.07.2019 The ministry has further forwarded letter dated

find a company secretary or there is a deficit

25.07.2019 The ICSI has addressed and made its

We Shall be pleased to provide any further

03.01.2020 The MCA has issued the notification dated

totally exempted from the appointment of

08.01.2020 As the capital limit has increased in spite of

whole hearted support to its members and

09.01.2020 The ICSI has again issued the advisory to all

directly to any authority /forum, as the

10.01.2020 The ICSI has written the letter to the MCA

Every company which has a paid up share

a. Turnover of hundred Crores rupees or more;

b. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks

Shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary.

Explanation- For the purpose of this sub rule,

the paid up share capital, turnover, or

Or ALTERNATE SUGGESTION -2:

Every Company which has:

a. A paid up share capital of ten crores rupees or

b. Turnover of one hundred crores rupees or

c. Outstanding loans or borrowings from banks

Shall have a Whole Time Company Secretary.

Explanation:- For the purpose of this sub rule,

11.01.2020 That the petitioner not being satisfied by the

the strong submission before the Ministry.

03.02.2020 However, the ICSI have re approached for the

“Every company which has:

a. A paid up share capital of ten

b. Net worth of one hundred crores

c. Outstanding loans or borrowings