Calcutta High Court Upholds Order Dismissing Plea Challenging Shift Of NCLT Premises To New Town

The Calcutta High Court has upheld a single bench order declining a plea challenging the move to shift the NCLT Kolkata premises located near the High Court, to a new building in the city's New Town area, as proposed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.

A division bench of Justices Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Apurba Sinha Ray held: "The question, however, is not whether the shift in location is beneficial or detrimental per se, but whether this Court can, in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction, intervene in such matters of administrative discretion. The answer to that must be in the negative."

"It is a well-settled principle of constitutional law that the judiciary must maintain institutional boundaries and refrain from trenching upon the domain of the executive. Matters relating to the selection of premises, allocation of infrastructure and logistical decisions regarding the functioning of tribunals fall squarely within the realm of policy formulation and administrative convenience. Courts are not equipped, nor are they mandated, to undertake such evaluations or substitute their own judgments in place of that of the competent authorities," they added.

The counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the judgment dated 25th March, 2025, passed by the Single Judge, is untenable in law and liable to be set aside as the Single Judge failed to appreciate that the proposal of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) to shift the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata Bench, to the newly constructed Corporate Bhawan is arbitrary, devoid of cogent reasons and lacks transparency.

The proposal seeks to house the Tribunal alongside various executive offices under the MCA, including the Regional Director, Registrar of Companies, Official Liquidator and Serious Fraud Investigation Office. Such a move undermines the fundamental doctrine of separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary, thereby defeating the constitutional mandate laid down in Article 50 of the Constitution of India.

Counsel for the respondents submits that writ petitioners herein the appellants are neither aggrieved nor have demonstrated any violation of their fundamental rights, which is a precondition to invoking the Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is solely based on the decision of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs to shift the NCLT, Kolkata Bench, from its current location near the Calcutta High Court to Corporate Bhawan, New Town.

The appellants merely allege inconvenience to advocates, clerks and litigants, which cannot constitute legal injury or locus standi to maintain the writ petition. The writ petition, in substance, seeks to indirectly assert a public interest, which is impermissible in the guise of a personal writ. Furthermore, the location and functioning of a tribunal fall within the domain of policy decisions of the executive and are not subject to judicial review unless shown to be arbitrary or malafide, which is not the case here.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal.

Case: NCLT Advocates Bar Association & Ors. -Vs- Union of India & Ors

Case No: MAT 469 of 2025

Click here to read order