Natesan, Thushar move Kerala HC against disqualification from SNDP Yogam posts

Kochi: SNDP Yogam general secretary Vellappally Natesan and his son Thushar Vellappally, the vice president of the Yogam, have approached high court with an appeal challenging a judgment of a single bench that disqualified them from holding posts in the Yogam and declared their offices vacant for violations of the Companies Act, 2013.A bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V M Syam Kumar is scheduled to consider the appeal on Tuesday. In its judgment, the single bench noted two violations. One was that the office-bearers of SNDP Yogam had violated Section 152(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, which provides that no person shall be appointed as director of a company unless they possess a director identification number (DIN). The second point was that SNDP Yogam did not file annual accounts and returns from 2006-07 to 2016-17 until Sept 2020, as required under Section 274(1)(g) of the Companies Act, 1956, later replaced by Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, 2013. Since the returns were not filed for three consecutive years, the directors had attracted disqualification from 2009 onwards.However, in the appeal, Natesan and Thushar contended that the petitions that resulted in their disqualification were not maintainable since the dispute relates to the alleged disqualification of directors and the internal management of a company, which fall within the jurisdiction of the National Company Law Tribunal. Section 430 of the Companies Act expressly bars the jurisdiction of civil courts and other forums in matters that the tribunal is empowered to determine. They further relied on a division bench judgment which held that SNDP Yogam, being a private company, is not amenable to writ jurisdiction and that disputes relating to its internal affairs must be resolved through statutory remedies under company law.The appellants also challenged the single bench's direction to the state to appoint directors to manage the affairs of the Yogam, arguing that such directions fundamentally alter the administration of the organisation and could not have been issued in writ jurisdiction, particularly when the question of disqualification of directors falls within the statutory jurisdiction of the National Company Law Tribunal.