Rotational nomination under articles enforced: tribunal upheld waiver, invalidated disputed election meeting, and ordered fresh committee steps.

Section 244 waiver was granted despite the petitioners not meeting the numerical eligibility threshold, because the Tribunal treated the dispute's history, prima facie oppression allegations, and the need to protect the interests represented by the petitioners as exceptional circumstances. It held that the waiver factors are not exhaustive and that maintainability could not be denied merely due to the petitioners' small numbers. The executive committee meeting of 30 October 2018 was declared null and void because the federation departed from its Articles of Association and settled rotational practice for regional nomination and election of the President. The resulting elections and appointments were invalid, and fresh steps were directed for constitution of the committee, AGM, and presidential election in accordance with the Articles and rotational practice.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the petitioners were entitled to waiver of the eligibility requirement under Section 244 of the Companies Act, 2013 to maintain the petition alleging oppression and mismanagement; (ii) whether the executive committee meeting held on 30 October 2018 and the consequential election and appointments were valid under the Articles of Association and the established practice of the federation.

Issue (i): Whether the petitioners were entitled to waiver of the eligibility requirement under Section 244 of the Companies Act, 2013 to maintain the petition alleging oppression and mismanagement.

Analysis: The petitioners did not satisfy the numerical threshold under Section 244, but the dispute disclosed a sustained controversy concerning the manner in which the federation was being run, including repeated clashes over rotational presidency, compliance with the Articles of Association, and alleged exclusion of the Eastern Region's nominee. The Tribunal treated the earlier litigation history and the prima facie allegations of oppressive conduct as relevant exceptional circumstances. It also held that the statutory factors for waiver are not exhaustive and that the interests represented by the petitioners could not be ignored merely because the petition was filed by a numerically small body.

Conclusion: The waiver was granted and the petition was held maintainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the executive committee meeting held on 30 October 2018 and the consequential election and appointments were valid under the Articles of Association and the established practice of the federation.

Analysis: The Tribunal found that Article 52 had consistently been implemented by region-wise rotational nomination and election, with the concerned regional association putting forward its nominee for the turn that had fallen to it. The record showed that the Eastern Region had nominated its chosen candidate, yet other members sought to substitute another willing or unwilling candidate and proceeded with voting in a manner inconsistent with past practice. The Tribunal also held that the outgoing President should not have chaired the election of office-bearers in the absence of a validly elected President, and that the election of office-bearers in that setting departed from the federation's established procedure.

Conclusion: The meeting of 30 October 2018 was declared null and void, and all actions taken pursuant to it were held invalid save for statutory compliance directions already passed.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded. The impugned meeting and consequential acts were set aside, and fresh steps were directed for constitution of the executive committee, holding of the AGM, and election of the President in accordance with the Articles of Association and the rotational practice.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a company's articles and settled practice require rotational regional nomination for the office of President, deviation from that practice without justification, coupled with conduct showing exclusion of the region entitled to the turn, constitutes oppression and renders the resulting meeting and decisions invalid.

---