Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 78377 (ORI)

BIKRAM KISHORA DAS v. UNION OF INDIA

WP(C)/8330/2019 · 2025-12-04

S K Panigrahi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.8330 of 2019 Bikram Kishora Das …. Petitioner(s) M/s. Supriya Patra, Adv. -versus- Union of India & Ors. …. Opposite Party(s) M/s. Gopala Krushna Nayak, CGC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. 03. ORDER 04.12.2025 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard the parties. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that, in the meantime, the reliefs sought in the present Writ Petition have been rendered infructuous by efflux of time, as the period relevant to the impugned action no longer survives for adjudication. 4. At this juncture, learned counsel for the Union of India has raised the preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the Writ Petition. It is contended that the dispute stems from proceedings arising under the Companies Act, 2013, and therefore the appropriate statutory forum for redressal is the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which exercises exclusive jurisdiction over matters concerning disqualification of Directors and related issues. It is further submitted that under Section Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Jan-2026 11:59:00 Signature Not Verified 164 of the Companies Act, 2013, the statutory period of disqualification for a Director is five years, and that period, in the present case, has already lapsed. Consequently, even on merits, the substratum of the Petitioner’s grievance does not survive for adjudication and the prayer in the Writ Petition no longer calls for any effective or executable relief. 5. In view of the above submissions and considering that no live issue remains to be adjudicated, this Court is of the opinion that the Writ Petition has been rendered infructuous. No further orders are, therefore, required to be passed in the matter. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of as infructuous, leaving the parties to bear their respective costs. 7. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge B. Jhankar CUTTACK