https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752950 An application for shifting a company's registered office under Section 13 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 30 of the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014 requires the authority to examine reports, objections and statutory criteria, so the function is quasi-judicial rather than purely executive. On that basis, the Delhi HC upheld the Tribunal's view that disciplinary action could not rest merely on an alleged erroneous or negligent order passed in discharge of that function. In the absence of allegations of corruption, extraneous influence, financial irregularity or personal gain, the charge memorandum was unsustainable and the quashing of disciplinary proceedings was left undisturbed. en-us Wed, 15 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 May 2024 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752950 An application for shifting a company's registered office under Section 13 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 30 of the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014 requires the authority to examine reports, objections and statutory criteria, so the function is quasi-judicial rather than purely executive. On that basis, the Delhi HC upheld the Tribunal's view that disciplinary action could not rest merely on an alleged erroneous or negligent order passed in discharge of that function. In the absence of allegations of corruption, extraneous influence, financial irregularity or personal gain, the charge memorandum was unsustainable and the quashing of disciplinary proceedings was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 15 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752950