Safiya Malik

Justice (Retd) Sharad Kumar Sharma, a judicial member of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Chennai bench, has recused himself from hearing an appeal filed by Riju Raveendran against a National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) order. The appeal challenges the inclusion of Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance in the Committee of Creditors (CoC) overseeing Byju’s Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Justice Sharma stated that his prior professional association with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), which had filed the original insolvency plea against Byju’s, necessitated his recusal. The matter is now expected to be placed before NCLAT Chairperson Justice (retd) Ashok Bhushan.

Byju’s insolvency proceedings originated from a plea filed by the BCCI, which led to the company being admitted into CIRP. In its order dated January 29, 2024, the NCLT directed the inclusion of Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance in the CoC after setting aside the Resolution Professional’s (RP) decision to exclude them. Riju Raveendran, a stakeholder in Byju’s, subsequently challenged this ruling before the NCLAT.

During the hearing on February 8, 2025, Justice Sharma recused himself, stating: "I was not only conducting cases for BCCI, I was also closely associated with the board and the players."

This marks the second time Justice Sharma has stepped away from a case related to Byju’s insolvency, having previously recused himself from an appeal against the insolvency order in July 2024. Following his recusal, Senior Advocates Arun Kathpalia and Arvindh Pandian appeared for the litigating parties. The matter will now be reassigned.

The NCLT’s January 29, 2024, order focused on the conduct of the RP, Pankaj Srivastava, and the exclusion of Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance from the CoC. The bench, comprising Judicial Member K. Biswal and Technical Member Ravichandran Ramaswamy, held that the RP’s actions were “prejudicial to the interests of the CIRP and to the stakeholders.” The tribunal also observed: "The conduct of the IRP was not fit and proper or as expected from an officer of the tribunal."

Accordingly, the NCLT issued the following directives:

1. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) was instructed to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the RP.

2. The RP was removed from the CIRP process.

3. The newly constituted CoC, now including Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance, was directed to appoint a new RP.

4. All decisions taken by the RP in consultation with the previous CoC were quashed.

The tribunal has yet to rule on the BCCI’s application under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) seeking to withdraw the insolvency proceedings.

The Supreme Court had previously intervened in Byju’s insolvency case. On October 23, 2024, it allowed an appeal by Glas Trust challenging an NCLAT decision that had halted the insolvency process against Think & Learn Pvt. Ltd., the parent company of Byju’s. The Supreme Court set aside the NCLAT’s order, which had accepted a settlement between Byju Raveendran and BCCI, and remanded the matter to the NCLT for fresh consideration.

Following this, Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance moved applications before the NCLT, contending that the RP had initially recognized only one financial creditor, resulting in a CoC composed of a single entity holding 100 percent voting rights. The NCLT’s January 29 order addressed this by including the additional creditors.

Meanwhile, the BCCI has maintained that its Section 12A application to withdraw the insolvency proceedings should be heard as a priority.