70th ICAI Northern India Regional Council Meeting Without Notice: Delhi HC Sets Aside Member's Seat Vacation
Manu Sharma
17 March 2026 7:01 PM IST
The Delhi High Court has set aside a decision of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) declaring an electedNorth India Regional Council member's seat vacant, holding that one of the meetings relied upon for invoking automatic vacation under the regulations had been convened without proper notice and could not be relied upon for the purpose of treating the member as absent from three consecutive meetings.
The court noted that under Regulation 135(3) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988, a member vacates the seat automatically if absent from three consecutive meetings without leave and that the consequence does not require prior adjudication or opportunity of hearing.
However, the court clarified that for such consequence to arise, the meetings relied upon must be validly convened. Referring to Regulation 142, the Court observed that a meeting of the Regional Council can be convened only after issuing at least fourteen days' prior notice, and that a shorter notice is permissible only if the conditions prescribed in the proviso, such as concurrence of the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and Secretary, or approval of the members, are satisfied
Observing that the condition was not met in the present case, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held, "In view of the foregoing discussion, the 70th meeting dated 15.04.2025 is hereby declared as having been convened without proper notice. Consequently, the impugned communication dated 06.11.2025, whereby, the petitioner has been informed of the vacation of his seat in the Council, as also the notice of the same date for the 73rd meeting scheduled for 13.11.2025, is set aside"
The petitioner, Gaurav Aggrawal, a chartered accountant and elected member of the Northern India Regional Council (NIRC) of ICAI for the 2025–2029 term, had challenged a communication dated November 6, 2025 informing him that his seat stood vacated under Regulation 135(3) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988.
This provision states that a member shall be deemed to vacate their seat if they are absent from three consecutive meetings without leave. The petitioner also questioned the legality of several meetings held in April-May 2025, contending that they were conducted without proper notice and in violation of procedural requirements.
The Court observed that Regulation 135(3) creates a deeming fiction and operates automatically without requiring any adjudication or prior hearing. It was noted that “the deemed vacation of the seat… is not dependent upon any adjudication" and therefore rejected the petitioner's argument that the action was invalid for lack of notice or opportunity of hearing.
However, the Court proceeded to examine whether the meetings forming the basis of the petitioner's absence were validly convened. It analysed Regulation 142, which governs notice for meetings and requires 14 days' prior notice, with exceptions permitting shorter notice subject to specified conditions.
The court clarified that while the length of notice may be flexible, the conditions for convening meetings at shorter notice such as concurrence of office bearers or approval of members, are mandatory.
The Court found that the 70th meeting dated April 15, 2025 was convened without valid approval of a majority of members for short notice. It held that approval by only eight out of eighteen members did not satisfy the requirement, and therefore the meeting was invalid.
Since this meeting formed part of the sequence used to establish three consecutive absences, the foundation for invoking automatic vacation failed.
Accordingly, the Court held that the 70th meeting of the ICAI North India Regional Council was convened without proper notice and set aside the communication dated declaring the petitioner's seat vacant, along with the notice for a subsequent meeting. The cour, however, declined to grant relief seeking removal of the Council Chairman, finding no mala fides.
For Petitioner: Dr. J.K. Mittal, Vandana Mittal and Mukesh Choudhary
For Respondents: Pooja Mehra Saigal, Sr. Advocate, with Vibhooti Malhotra, bhuvnesh Satija, Yash Baraliya, Aniket Khanduri, Nivesh Dixit, Advocates