Calcutta High Court Declines Plea Challenging Shift Of NCLT Kolkata Premises To New Town, Says Talks For Shifting Of HC Also In Pipeline

The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the proposed shift of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata premises, away from its present location near the High Court, to a new area in the city's New Town area.

Justice Amrita Sinha held: "From time immemorial people have resisted to change and shift from one place to the other. Relocation is painful. Adjusting to a new place may not be easy always. There may be difficulties and challenges in the process. The initial logistic issues, financial uncertainties, time adjustments and various other factors may crop up. None is strong enough to stall or stop the process of relocation for the sole reason that the shift is for the public purpose. The shift of the location of the High Court to New Town is also in the pipeline, and may be, over a period of time, both the institutions will again be in the vicinity of the other."

I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners have not been able to make out a case, far less a strong case, requiring stalling the shift of NCLT from its existing place to the new one. The Tribunal has already notified setting up of a new bench. It is expected that all stakeholders will accept the shifting of NCLT to the new building without any grudge or ill feeling and work harmoniously in aid of proper and speedy dispensation of justice, she added.

The writ petition was filed challenging the act of the respondent authority in taking steps to shift the NCLT Kolkata bench from its present location to Corporate Bhawan at New Town.

Petitioner no. 1, Bar Association of the learned advocates practicing in NCLT, claimed to have its registered office at 6, Old Post Office Street, ground floor, room no. 36, Kolkata 700001; petitioner no. 2 claimed to be a litigant whose matters are pending adjudication before the Tribunal and the petitioner no. 3 claimed to be a clerk of an advocate who practices in NCLT.

It was submitted that the building where NCLT is currently located is in the vicinity of the High Court and it has enough space to house the benches that are presently functioning. The present location is easily accessible by all stakeholders including the learned advocates, their staff and the litigants.

The place where NCLT is sought to be shifted is in an extremely remote area approximately twenty-eight kilometres away from the High Court. The place is not properly accessible. There is lack of supportive infrastructure in and around the new site. None of the stakeholders will be able to avail the facility for which the Tribunal has been set up, it was submitted.

It was submitted that NCLT has been sought to be made an extended limb of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and that the independence of the judiciary will be highly impaired if the department is permitted to set up the Tribunal. NCLT ought to have been set up by the Ministry of Law and Justice and not by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, since there is high chance of the judiciary being influenced if the corporate affairs department is permitted to set up the infrastructural facility of NCLT.

It was stated that the importance of Article 50 of the Constitution of India relating to the separation of judiciary from the executive has been heavily relied upon. It has been submitted that the State is bound to take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State. If a particular department is permitted to lend infrastructural support to the judiciary, there is high possibility that the judiciary may not be in a position to function independently.

It has been submitted that neither public opinion nor the opinion of the stakeholders was sought for prior to taking a decision to shift NCLT. No advertisement or notification was published disclosing the shift of the venue of NCLT.

DSG appearing for the Union opposed the prayers and submitted that the writ petition was in the form of a public interest litigation and that the allegations regarding interference with the judiciary cannot be controverted since the Ministry of Corporate Affairs was not impleaded in the writ petition.

It was said that the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Tribunal being one crore and above, there are several matters which are pending adjudication. Due to scarcity of space and proper infrastructure, the litigants are faced with delay in getting justice in a timely manner.

All the vacancies cannot be filled up because of the space crunch as all required facilities cannot be provided to the members and the staff, and distance from the High Court cannot be a relevant factor for stalling the shift of the venue of NCLT, it was said.

It has been submitted that irrespective of the fact as to whether NCLT functions from the old site or the new one, all infrastructural facilities of the Tribunal are provided by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs all through.

It was denied that there will be any interference with the independence of the judiciary if the venue of NCLT is shifted as alleged or at all. The members of NCLT always functions independently and their activities are not interfered with either by the department or the Ministry in any manner whatsoever.

It was submitted that the new building has state of art offices and the offices of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, the Registrar of Companies, the Kolkata Official Liquidator attached to the High Court and the Serious Fraud Investigation Offices which are all scattered at different places would be brought in the same building for administrative convenience and also for the convenience of the public at large. The stakeholders will be able to utilise various facilities under one roof. The same will also enable the speedy and timely dispensation of justice resulting in an improvement in the ease of doing business in the State.

Accordingly, the court noted that the petitioners were not able to make out a case for interference and dismissed the plea.

Case: NCLT Advocates Bar Association, Kolkata Bench & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. 

Case No: WPA 4927 of 2023

Click here to read order