Court Revokes Director Disqualification for Non-Filing, Allows DIN/DSC Reactivation

The court set aside the petitioner's disqualification as a director under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013, due to non-filing of annual returns and balance sheets, allowing reactivation of the petitioner's DIN/DSC for compliance filing in active companies. Despite arguments of delay and latches, the court considered the continuing cause of action during disqualification, distinguishing the case from instances of unexplained delays. Citing precedents like Mukut Pathak and Anjali Bhargava, the court directed the petitioner to serve the reactivation order on ROC, Delhi and Mumbai within 10 days, resolving the petition and related applications promptly.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disqualification of the petitioner as a director under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013.
2. Delay and latches in approaching the court for relief.
3. Legal position regarding discretionary jurisdiction of writ courts in cases of unexplained delay.
4. Application of judgments in similar cases to the present situation.
5. Reactivation of the petitioner's DIN/DSC for filing compliances in active companies.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner was disqualified as a director in one of the companies due to non-filing of annual returns and balance sheets, leading to deactivation of his DIN/DSC until October 2022. The petitioner sought reactivation to enable compliance filing for all five active companies he directs.

2. The respondents argued that the petition was time-barred, citing delay and latches since the disqualification in 2017. They referenced judgments emphasizing reluctance in granting relief for unexplained delays.

3. The court found the disqualification created a continuing cause of action as the petitioner couldn't fulfill compliance requirements during the ongoing disqualification period. Precedents showed restoration orders granted in similar cases, distinguishing the present situation from cases with unexplained delays.

4. Referring to judgments like Mukut Pathak and Anjali Bhargava, the court set aside the disqualification for other active companies as it occurred before May 2018, directing reactivation of the petitioner's DIN/DSC.

5. The court ordered the petitioner to serve the order on ROC, Delhi and Mumbai for reactivation within 10 days, disposing of the petition and related applications accordingly. The judgment highlighted the distinction from cases with significant delays, emphasizing the ongoing disqualification period's impact on the petitioner's rights.

---