https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102245 Section 10E of the Companies Act, 1956 was upheld because the Company Law Board's adjudicatory role remained subject to judicial review through appeal and constitutional remedies, making it a permissible substitution of forum rather than an ouster of court control. The qualification and selection rules for Board members were struck down as arbitrary and unreasonable because they failed to secure adequate judicial training, judicial predominance, and an independent selection process, with executive-dominated appointments undermining independence. Rule 10 fixing a five-year term was not invalidated on its own. The Board's composition and selection scheme was directed to be reframed. en-us Mon, 13 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:12:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102245 Section 10E of the Companies Act, 1956 was upheld because the Company Law Board's adjudicatory role remained subject to judicial review through appeal and constitutional remedies, making it a permissible substitution of forum rather than an ouster of court control. The qualification and selection rules for Board members were struck down as arbitrary and unreasonable because they failed to secure adequate judicial training, judicial predominance, and an independent selection process, with executive-dominated appointments undermining independence. Rule 10 fixing a five-year term was not invalidated on its own. The Board's composition and selection scheme was directed to be reframed. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 13 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102245