The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Private Limited, formerly known as Essar Steel India Limited, on a petition filed by the Central government challenging a Gujarat High Court judgment regarding the administrative authority of the President of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to transfer cases from one Bench to another beyond their territorial jurisdiction.
The order was passed by the Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana on the petition concerning the interpretation of Rule 16(d) of the NCLT Rules, 2016, which authorised the NCLT President to reassign any matter to an alternative Bench, as deemed necessary by the circumstances.
The High Court had ruled that the provision did not empower the NCLT President to transfer matters beyond the territorial jurisdiction assigned to a particular Bench. On that basis, the High Court set aside administrative orders transferring matters relating to ArcelorMittal from the NCLT Ahmedabad Bench to the NCLT Mumbai Bench.
Challenging the ruling, the Union government argued before the Supreme Court that the High Court had incorrectly read a territorial restriction into Rule 16(d), despite no such limitation being expressly contained in the provision.
According to the Centre, the NCLT functioned as a single, unified tribunal with nationwide jurisdiction under a unified administrative structure. It submitted that individual Benches were constituted primarily for administrative convenience and accessibility, not to create inflexible geographical limitations.
The government further contended that the transfer power under Rule 16(d) extended to inter-state transfers between NCLT Benches whenever circumstances justify such action.
The plea also highlighted the practical necessity behind the transfer orders. Two Ahmedabad Benches had recused themselves from hearing the Essar Steel-related matters in 2024, prompting administrative intervention to avoid disruption of judicial proceedings.
The Centre argued that if the High Court’s interpretation was sustained, recusals or vacancies at a particular Bench could effectively halt adjudication.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Niral R Mehta of the Gujarat High Court had earlier quashed both the recusal orders and the subsequent transfer orders issued by the NCLT President. Subsequently, in February 2026, a Division Bench of the High Court directed the Union government to approach the Supreme Court, noting that a similar legal issue was already pending before the Apex Court.
The post Supreme Court issues notice on Centre plea challenging Gujarat High Court verdict on NCLT transfers appeared first on India Legal.