While granting relief to a Company Secretary, the appellate authority held that imposition of one lakh rupees as fine on a Company Secretary is unreasonable. While reducing the fine to fifty thousand rupees, the authority advised the disciplinary committee to keep uniformity in awarding punishments in similar nature of professional misconduct.
In the instant case, one Mr. Mr. Pawan Kumar Shadija made a complaint before the Institute of Company Secretaries of India against the appellant, Mr. Praveen Kumar Kaunungo. He alleged that the Company Secretary had not exercised due diligence while certifying two Forms 32, due to which name of four Directors were removed from the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.
After conducting enquiry, the disciplinary committee decided to remove the name of the appellant from the register of the Institute for one year and also imposed a fine of Rs. One lakh on failure of which, he will be removed the register of IVSI for another one year.
Aggrieved by the order, the appellant approached the appellate authority contending that the quantum of punishment is exorbitant considering the punishment awarded by the DC in similar cases.
After hearing the submissions, the Appellate Authority found that punishment awarded in the present matter is certainly on the higher side, enormous and harsh in comparison with the punishment awarded to the errant members of the Institute by the Disciplinary Committee for the violation of same professional misconduct in other cases.
“Further, we are of view that the interest of justice will be met out by reducing the punishment awarded to the Appellant. Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred on this Authority under clause (b) of subsection (2) of Section 22E of the Company Secretaries Act, 1980, we hereby reduce the punishment awarded and the fine imposed on the Appellant by the Disciplinary Committee of the Institute and passes the following order in this regard,” the Members said.
“The Authority also wishes to advise the Disciplinary Committee to keep uniformity in awarding the punishment in similar nature of professional misconduct in the interest of justice in future, of course the ultimate impact of the negligence caused by the Appellant be given the appropriate weightage besides considering other facts and circumstances involved in the matter for deciding the punishment for violation of any professional duty expected to be carried out by the members of the Institute.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
