Byju’s insolvency resolution professional (RP) Pankaj Srivastava removed Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance from the CoC when he reconstituted the Committee
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on Wednesday has reportedly reserved its order on the appeals filed by creditors of edtech start-up Byju’s, Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance, seeking to be added to the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and the Board of Control for Cricket in India's (BCCI) application to withdraw its insolvency petition against Byju's.
The creditors petition pertains to the removal of Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance from the CoC by Byju’s insolvency resolution professional (RP) Pankaj Srivastava, when he reconstituted the Committee.
In November 2024, BCCI moved an application in the NCLT for withdrawal of its insolvency plea against ed-tech firm Byju’s. This move was followed by the Supreme Court ruling on October 23, which quashed a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order allowing a settlement between BCCI and Byju's.
Byju’s insolvency resolution professional (RP) Pankaj Srivastava told the court that after the Supreme Court order, the committee was provisionally formed due to pressure from Glas Trust to establish the CoC.
He further said that a letter was issued to all the financial creditors stating that their claims have not been admitted yet and are subject to further verification. “The pressure on the RP began from day one, with pressure especially from Glas Trust,” Srivastava reportedly said.
The court in response reprimanded the RP, asking if he was so vulnerable to be influenced so easily.
“You have been given enormous power by this court. You are representing us. You should come to us and tell us that somebody is putting pressure on you. You are not an independent authority; you are acting on our behalf, please understand that,” the NCLT bench reportedly said.
Earlier, the counsel for Srivastava argued that Glas Trust’s claim to be included in the CoC was contested due to an ongoing New York court case pertaining to the term loan B (TLB) extended to Byju’s.
Glas Trust’s advocate Srinivasa Raghavan contested the claim by saying that the RP was aware of these cases even before the initial constitution of the CoC.
The counsel for Glas Trust countered that once the CoC is formed, the RP does not have the authority to reconstitute it, as that power rests with the NCLT. “We must be inducted into the CoC, and the CoC must be reconstituted,” the counsel said.
Aditya Birla’s representative Pramod Nair argued that the RP can revise the amount but once the status of a creditor as a financial creditor is determined, there cannot be any further unilateral reclassification by the RP.