Disciplinary inquiry under the Chartered Accountants Act upheld where notice, hearing, cross-examination, and reasoned findings were provided.

A disciplinary inquiry under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 was sustained because the Council and Disciplinary Committee followed the statutory procedure, gave notice and hearing, allowed cross-examination, and considered the evidence and record at both stages. The misconduct findings were treated as falling within the relevant First Schedule clauses and other misconduct, and the proposed reprimand was assessed on proportionality. No procedural infirmity, perversity, or non-consideration of material was found, so the findings and recommended punishment were upheld and there was no ground to interfere with the Council's recommendation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent were conducted in accordance with the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 and the Regulations framed thereunder, and whether the finding of misconduct warranting reprimand was justified.

Analysis: The matter was governed by the unamended provisions of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. The Council had first formed a prima facie opinion, referred the complaint to the Disciplinary Committee, and thereafter considered the committee's report after giving an opportunity of hearing. The Disciplinary Committee recorded evidence of both sides, afforded cross-examination, and based its findings on the material before it. The Council also considered the record and accepted the findings after hearing the parties. No procedural infirmity, perversity, or non-consideration of record was found in either stage of the proceedings. The misconduct was found to fall within the relevant clauses of the First Schedule and within the category of other misconduct, and the recommended punishment was examined on the footing of proportionality.

Conclusion: The disciplinary process was valid, the findings of misconduct were sustained, and the recommendation to reprimand the respondent was held to be justified and proportionate.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by upholding the disciplinary findings and the proposed punishment, leaving no ground to interfere with the Council's recommendation.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a disciplinary inquiry under the governing statute is conducted with notice, opportunity of hearing, cross-examination, and reasoned consideration of the evidence, the resultant finding of misconduct and a proportionate reprimand will not be interfered with absent perversity or procedural illegality.

---