Written allegation required for disciplinary initiation; general reports and prior observations cannot found jurisdiction.

Disciplinary proceedings against a chartered accountancy firm could not be sustained because the governing rules required a complaint or written information containing allegations against the firm as the jurisdictional basis for initiation. A report on accounting firms, prior correspondence, and observations made in another proceeding were held insufficient where no written allegation had been received against the petitioner-firm. On that footing, the prima facie opinion and reference to the Disciplinary Committee lacked jurisdiction, and the impugned communication was liable to be quashed. The petition was allowed and the disciplinary action set aside for failure to satisfy the statutory precondition for commencement of proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the disciplinary proceedings and prima facie opinion could be sustained when the foundation for initiation was not a written information containing allegations against the firm as required by the governing rules.

Analysis: The petition challenged the initiation of disciplinary action on the footing that the material relied upon was only a report, prior correspondence and observations in another proceeding, and not a written information alleging misconduct against the petitioner-firm. The governing framework under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 and the 2007 Rules requires receipt of complaint or written information containing allegations, followed by the prescribed procedural steps. The Court held that the report on multinational network accounting firms and the Supreme Court observations, in the absence of any written allegation against the petitioner-firm, could not be treated as information within Rule 7. As the foundational requirement for invoking the disciplinary machinery was absent, the subsequent prima facie opinion and reference to the Disciplinary Committee were unsupported by jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The initiation of disciplinary proceedings was without jurisdiction and the impugned communication and prima facie opinion were liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The petition was allowed and the disciplinary action set aside because the statutory precondition for commencement of proceedings was not satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute and rules make written information containing allegations a jurisdictional basis for disciplinary action, proceedings cannot validly commence on the basis of general reports or observations unconnected with any such allegation against the person proceeded against.

---