HC Quashes Removal of ICAI Council Member Over Improper Meeting Notice:

HC Quashes Removal of ICAI Council Member Over Improper Meeting Notice

High Court quashes removal, holds mandatory notice rules violated in council meeting proceedings

Court rules seven-day notice essential for valid council meeting decisions

authorMeetu KumaridateMar 18, 2026
Last update on Mar 18, 2026
HC Quashes Removal of ICAI Council Member Over Improper Meeting Notice The petitioner, Gaurav Aggrawal, a member of the Northern India Regional Council (NIRC) of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), challenged his removal from the Council. The NIRC had informed him via a communication dated November 6, 2025, that his seat had been vacated because he failed to attend three consecutive meetings (the 70th, 71st, and 72nd meetings).
ITAT Delhi Quashes Reassessment as Section 148 Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period
The petitioner contended that the 70th meeting, held on April 15, 2025, was illegally convened as he received the notice less than 24 hours before the meeting. He argued this violated Regulation 142 of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988, which requires at least seven days' notice for a regional council meeting unless a shorter notice is approved by the members.

Issue Raised: Whether the 70th meeting of the NIRC was validly convened despite the lack of a mandatory seven-day notice, and whether the subsequent vacation of the petitioner’s seat under Regulation 147 (for absence from three consecutive meetings) was legally sustainable.

ITAT Delhi Quashes Reassessment as Section 148 Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period
HC's Ruling: The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that Regulation 142 is mandatory and stipulating a seven-day notice period is a safeguard to ensure effective participation of elected members. The Court found that for the 70th meeting, the notice was issued on April 14 for a meeting on April 15, and there was no evidence that the "shorter notice" was approved by the members as required by the proviso to Regulation 142.

Since the 70th meeting was not "properly convened," the petitioner's absence from it could not be counted toward the "three consecutive meetings" required to trigger a vacation of seat under Regulation 147. Consequently, the Court set aside the communication declaring his seat vacant and the notice for the 73rd meeting, restoring the petitioner to his position.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2157
Up Next

Loading suggestions…