NCLAT Dismisses DoT Appeal Against Rolta India Resolution Plan, Cites Its Implementation

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on Thursday dismissed the Department of Telecommunications' (DoT) appeal challenging the National Company Law Tribunal's (NCLT) approval of the ₹900 crore resolution plan for Rolta India Limited.

It held that once a resolution plan has been approved and fully implemented, statutory creditors cannot seek to reopen claims they failed to pursue in time.

A bench of Judicial Member Justice Yogesh Khanna and Technical Members Barun Mitra and Ajai Das Mehrotra said interfering with an approved resolution plan after it has attained finality would be inappropriate.

The bench ruled, “Thus, the resolution process having attained finality and the plan having been acted upon, interference to the Order dated 15.12.2025 at this stage, would be inappropriate, and that the sanctity of an approved and implemented resolution plan is not to be disturbed on claims that were not timeously agitated.”

Rolta India entered insolvency in January 2023 after the Mumbai bench of the NCLT admitted insolvency proceedings against the company. On December 15, 2025, the tribunal approved the resolution plan submitted by successful resolution applicant Ashdan Properties Pvt. Ltd.

The DoT, an operational creditor, had granted ISP licenses to Rolta India in 1998 and 2002. The company was required to pay licence fees based on Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR).

After Rolta defaulted, the DoT issued demand notices, which the company challenged before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT). The tribunal stayed the recovery of the dues in August 2018.

On August 31, 2023, the DoT filed a claim of ₹469.09 crore, subject to upward revision for interest and penalties, over unpaid licence fees for the financial years 2005-06 and 2006-07

The Resolution Professional categorised the claim as "not acceptable but contingent", citing TDSAT's interim stay order.

Before the appellate tribunal, the department argued that around ₹179 crore of its claim had been admitted. However, the resolution plan allocated only ₹10 lakh towards government and statutory dues out of the ₹900-crore resolution amount. The DoT argued that this treatment was contrary to the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

The bench noted that the resolution professional had informed the DoT on September 25, 2023 that its claim had been categorised as contingent. The department did not challenge that decision before the adjudicating authority. Instead, it continued pursuing relief before TDSAT in an attempt to get the interim stay vacated.

The NCLT approved the resolution plan in December 2025. It was fully implemented on February 2, 2026, when the company petition was also closed. Given this, the bench held that the DoT could not revive issues it had failed to challenge at the appropriate stage.

Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta, the bench reiterated that a successful resolution applicant cannot be saddled with fresh claims after a resolution plan has been approved.

“This is especially considering the settled principle of law that the successful resolution applicant cannot be faced with any fresh claims in the nature of hydra pops, especially after the approval of the resolution plan by the Learned Adjudicating Authority…”

The tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.