Disciplinary Committee composition under the IBC raised a prima facie issue, leading to an interim stay on the challenged order.

A writ challenge questioned a disciplinary order on the basis that the Disciplinary Committee under Section 220(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was required to consist of whole-time members, and that the impugned order was signed by only one member. The court found a prima facie issue on compliance with the statutory composition requirement and granted interim protection by staying the impugned order until the next returnable date. Notice was also issued.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned disciplinary order was liable to be stayed on the ground that it was signed by a single member and whether a prima facie case was made out for interim protection.

Analysis: The writ application challenged the order passed by the Board. The challenge raised a prima facie contention that the Disciplinary Committee must consist of whole-time members under Section 220(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and that the impugned order, having been signed by one member only, was contrary to the statutory requirement.

Conclusion: The impugned order was stayed till the next returnable date and notice was issued.

---