2017 Supreme(Del) 952
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
RAJ KUMAR DEVRAJ – Petitioner
Versus
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL & ANR. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 2084 of 2017
Decided On : 20-03-2017
For the Petitioner:Mr. Abhishek Kr. Rao and Ms. Bhavya, Advocates
For the Respondent:Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, CGSC with Mr. Ruchir Ranjan Rai and Mr. P.C. Jain and Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocates
The exercise of administrative discretion in reassigning part-heard matters and constituting benches falls within the purview of the President of the National Company Law Tribunal.
Headnote:
Administrative Orders - Reassignment of Part-Heard Matters - Companies Act, 2013, Section 419 - The court discussed the reassignment of part-heard matters by the President of the National Company Law Tribunal and the exercise of administrative discretion. The court referred to the Companies Act, 2013, Section 419 and emphasized the administrative exigencies for the disposal of cases. The court found no infirmity in the exercise of administrative discretion and dismissed the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the reassignment of part-heard matters by the President of the National Company Law Tribunal, contending that it would cause substantial loss and delay in the hearing of the matter.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no infirmity in the exercise of administrative discretion by the President of the National Company Law Tribunal and dismissed the petition. The petitioner was advised to request expeditious disposal of the matter before the Presiding Officer.
Issues: The issues revolved around the reassignment of part-heard matters, administrative orders, and the potential delay in the hearing of the petitioner's case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the exercise of administrative discretion in reassigning part-heard matters and constituting benches falls within the purview of the President of the National Company Law Tribunal and declined to interfere with such administrative decisions.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was advised to request expeditious disposal of the matter before the Presiding Officer.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
1. The petitioner impugns order dated 02.02.2017 issued by the President, National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT for short) re-constituting the benches at New Delhi and also the consequential order dated 02.02.2017 (incorrectly typed as 29.06.2016 in the typed copy) whereby the President has reassigned the part-heard matters pending before Smt. Ina Malhotra, Member (Judicial) to other benches.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petition filed by the petitioner, pending before Smt. Ina Malhotra, Member (Judicial) was substantially part heard, the same should not have been re-assigned to another Presiding Officer. It is submitted that on account of re-assignment, substantial loss is likely to be suffered by the petitioner in terms of legal fee as well as the hearing of the matter is going to be delayed. It is submitted that the matter was filed in the year 2006 and has been pending since then.
3. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Full Bench of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court (comprising of three Judges) in the matter of Smt. Chawali Vs. State of U.P. 2015(2) ALJ 402 and of the Supreme Court of India in the matter of High Court of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Special Deputy collector (L.A.), Andhra Pradesh & Ors. (2007) 13 SCC 580 to contend that normally part-heard matters should not be transferred from one Bench to the other, except in exceptional cases and that also for special reasons.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the orders impugned by the petitioner are administrative orders and were passed by the President of National Company Law Tribunal exercising his administrative powers of assigning benches and allocating work to the respective benches. It is submitted that the orders were passed keeping in view the administrative exigencies for the disposal of cases.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that by order dated 02.02.2017 part-heard matters pending before one bench were reassigned so that the matters could be expeditiously taken up for disposal.
6. The impugned orders dated 02.02.2017 reads as under:
“ORDER
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 419 of the Companies Act, 2013, the President, National Company Law Tribunal hereby re-constitutes the Benches at New Delhi for the purposes of exercising and discharging the Tribunal’s powers and functions. This is in partial modification of Order dated 5th July, 2016, 29th August, 2016 and 2nd November, 2016. The benches shall comprise of: NCLT, Principal Bench at New Delhi:
1. Chief Justice (Retd.) Shri M.M. Kumar, President
2. Shri R. Vardharajan, Member (Judicial)
NCLT, Division Bench at New Delhi:
1. Smt. Ina Malhotra, Member (Judicial)
2. Shri S.K. Mohapatra, Member (Judicial)
NCLT, Single Bench at New Delhi:
1. Shri Maharaj Krishna Hanjura, Member (Judicial)
2. All part heard matters pending before Division Bench and Single Bench at New Delhi shall stand released.
3. After taking up matters listed before the Division Benches, Hon’ble Members (Judicial) of the Division Benches shall sit single separately and take up matters listed before them for such Single Bench.
4. This Order shall come into force with effect from 6th February, 2017.”
And
“ORDER
1. In continuation of order dated 2nd February, 2017 regarding re-constitution of Benches, NCLT Delhi.
2. The part heard matter pending before Single Bench headed by Smt. Ina Malhotra Member (Judicial) stands released by order of the President and assigned to the Benches as under for disposal.
(i) To single Bench headed by Shri R. Varadhrajan, Member (Judicial matter) from serial no. 1 to 31 of Annexure. The Bench shall be after taken up the matter listed before the Principal Bench.
(ii) To Single Bench headed by Shri. Maharaj Krishna Hanjura, Member Judicial matter from Serial no. 32 to 61 Annexure.
(iii) To Single Bench headed by Smt. Ina Malhotra, Member Judicial matter beyond Serial No. 61 (Page No. 4 to 6 of the Annexure). The bench shall on