JUDGMENT
B.N. Kirpal, J.
(1) This judgment will dispose of appeal under section 22-A of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 filed by Mr. N.K. Gupta, Chartered Accountant as well as reference (Chartered Accountant Case No. 3 of 1980) under section 21 of the made to this Court by the Institute of Chartered Accountant of India.
(2) Briefly stated, the facts are that Mr. N.K. Gupta is a practicing Chartered Accountant and is fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants. Information was received against him alleging mis-conduct. Notice was issued to him and his reply was filed. Thereafter disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. The disciplinary committee of the Institute submitted its report on 13th September 1979. Thereafter, another disciplinary committee was constituted by the Council and a fresh report was submitted. It was held that the petitioner was guilty of violation of regulation No. 32-B. Thereafter the Council in the meetings held on 12th, 13th and 14th December 1979 held the petitioner to be guilty of professional mis-conduct on three counts and recommended that Mr. N.K. Gupta should be reprimanded. On two counts a reference has been made to this Court while on one count, Mr. Gupta has filed an appeal.
(3) It is not necessary to go into the facts of this case with regard to the alleged mis-conduct, in any great detail, because it is an admitted case that before the Council took a decision of imposing punishment of reprimand, no opportunity of being heard -was granted to Mr. Gupta. The Supreme Court in the case of Institute of Chartered Accountants v. L.K. Ratna, , has now held that under sections 21 and 22-A of the Act, the Council should give a hearing, to the chartered accountant against whom disciplinary proceedings are being taken before any decision is given against him. It was observed that the principles of natural justice must be read into these provisions and therefore it was necessary that personal hearing should be granted.
(4) As in the present case, personal hearing was not granted to Mr. Gupta, the decision of the Council cannot be sustained.
(5) In view of the aforesaid, the decision of the Council is set aside and liberty is granted to the Council to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.
(6) There will be no order as to costs.