carc3.05 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS REFERENCE CASE NO. 3 OF 2005 Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India .. PETITIONER VERSUS Shri S.A. Jaju .. RESPONDENT Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.M.Sharma, advocate for the respondent. WITH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS REFERENCE CASE NO. 1 OF 2006 Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. .. PETITIONER VERSUS Shri S.A. Jaju .. RESPONDENT Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.M.Sharma, advocate for the respondent. WITH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS REFERENCE CASE NO. 2 OF 2006 carc3.05 2 Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. .. PETITIONER VERSUS Shri V.R. Amin .. RESPONDENT Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.M.Sharma, advocate for the respondent. WITH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS REFERENCE CASE NO. 3 OF 2006 Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. .. PETITIONER VERSUS Shri V.R. Amin .. RESPONDENT Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.M.Sharma, advocate for the respondent. WITH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS REFERENCE CASE NO. 4 OF 2006 carc3.05 3 Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. .. PETITIONER VERSUS Shri C.N. Bhansali .. RESPONDENT Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.M.Sharma, advocate for the respondent. ===== CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 12 th JANUARY, 2011 PER COURT : 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 These references are made under section 21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 ( for short “the Act”) by the Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, constituted under the provisions of the Act, against the respondents holding them guilty of professional mis-conduct and recommending to this Court to make an order of reprimand. There is no dispute that on consideration of the report of the Disciplinary Committee, the letters / written representations of the respondents and the oral submissions made by the parties, the Council accepted the report of the carc3.05 4 Disciplinary Committee and observed that the respondents were guilty of professional mis-conduct within the meaning of clause (7) and (8) of Part I of the Second Schedule of the Act. The Council has thus recommended to this Court that the respondents be reprimanded. 2 As provided for in sub-section 6 of section 21 of the Act, on receipt of the references, today, we have heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that he has instructions not to contest the reference proceedings and accept the recommendations made by the Council to reprimand the respondents in terms of the provisions of section 21 of the Act. He filed undertakings duly signed by the proprietors of the respondents - firms stating so. The undertakings are taken on record and marked as 'X-1' to 'X-5' for identification. The undertakings given by the respondents are accepted. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the respondents and the undertakings filed by him on their behalf, we accept the recommendation made by the Council and reprimand the respondents. In other words, we accept the recommendation / order passed by the Council dated 22-7-1997 in Reference Nos. 1/2006 and 3/2005 and, dated 9-12-1997 in rest of the references, and hold the respondents guilty and reprimand them under section 21 of the Act. carc3.05 5 3 Before we part, we observe that the respondents in future will deviate from indulgeing in such practice and shall avoid such incidents. With these observations, all the references are disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE ) ( D.B. BHOSALE ) JUDGE JUDGE dyb