Plea seeking Tata Sons listing filed in Bombay High Court

Mumbai: A writ petition filed before the Bombay High Court has sought directions to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to ensure that Tata Sons lists its shares on the BSE and NSE, and the removal of Tata Trusts chairman Noel Tata from his positions in the trusts if he or other trustees obstruct the proposed listing.

Tata Sons wasn't available for a comment.

Also Read: Voltas reshuffles top leadership; Sunil D'Souza named Chairman


According to the filing before the Bombay High Court, Rohini Amin and L Ramanathan jointly filed writ petition on November 5. The petition names Tata Sons Ltd, N Chandrasekaran, Saurabh Agrawal, Harish Manwani, Anita M George, Noel Tata, Venu Srinivasan, Darius Khambata, Bhaskar Bhat and Siddharth Sharma as respondents. The plea also names all the trusts that constitute the Tata Trusts, regulators including the RBI and the Sebi, the Registrar of Companies, the Charity Commissioner and even the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) as respondents.

The court website shows the case at the pre admission stage. Nedumpara & Nedumpara, representing the petitioners told ET that a division bench headed by the Chief Justice has directed that the writ petition (lodging number 38839/2026), filed by Rohini Amin and others, be listed for a hearing on December 2. Meanwhile,a copy of the petition is to be served on the respondents.

Also Read: MakeMyTrip enters shared mobility segment with majority stake in Quick Ride

The petitioners have argued that Tata Sons, classified as a Core Investment Company (CIC) in the upper layer of non-banking financial companies (NBFCs), is required to list under the RBI's scale-based regulatory framework. They contend that the listing requirement applies to large CICs with assets exceeding Rs 1 lakh crore and claim that Tata Sons had net assets of more than Rs 2 lakh crore as of March 31, 2026.

They have alleged that the company has not complied with the regulatory requirement because Noel Tata wants to retain control over the group's holding company. The allegation is part of the petitioners' submissions and has not been adjudicated by the court.

The petitioners have sought directions to the RBI under Sections 45ID and 45IE of the RBI Act, including action against the company's board if it fails to comply with the listing requirement. They have sought either the supersession of the entire board or the removal of directors found to be obstructing the process.

A central argument in the petition is that Tata Sons should be viewed in the context of the charitable character of its majority shareholders. Tata Trusts collectively hold more than 67% of the company, making them its controlling shareholders.

The petitioners claim to represent the interests of poor and underprivileged beneficiaries of the trusts and argue that the public is the ultimate beneficial owner of a substantial portion of Tata Sons' assets, without having any direct shareholder rights or an effective mechanism to question its management. They have argued that the ownership structure warrants greater public accountability and that the corporate veil should be lifted to examine the relationship between Tata Sons and the charitable trusts controlling it. The petition also questions the jurisdictional boundaries between the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), civil courts and the Charity Commissioner under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. It contends that the Charity Commissioner has limited jurisdiction and cannot lift the corporate veil of Tata Sons or frame a comprehensive scheme for its administration. The petitioners have sought declarations that civil court jurisdiction is not completely barred under Section 50 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act and that Section 430 of the Companies Act does not oust civil court jurisdiction in matters beyond the adjudicatory powers of the NCLT and NCLAT.

The petitioners have also sought a declaration that Tata Sons should be governed by the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act to that extent that its provisions apply.

The petitioners have argued that a listing would bring greater transparency and accountability to Tata Sons while unlocking substantial value for its shareholders, including the charitable trusts. Valuing Tata Sons at around Rs 30 lakh crore, they contend that a public listing and initial public offering (IPO) could significantly enhance the financial resources available to the trusts for philanthropic activities. They have contrasted the estimated valuation with the roughly Rs 1,500 crore that the trusts currently receive as dividends.

The plea has urged the RBI not to dilute or defer the listing requirement and alleged that the regulator has failed to act on a representation seeking intervention. It also alleges that authorities have been subjected to undue pressure over the issue.