In short: On 29 October 2026, the Supreme Court said the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) had "completely hijacked" the administration of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), affecting its autonomy. The Court asked the presidents of the NCLT and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to send proposals on infrastructure and staffing within four weeks.
What happened?
A Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana was hearing a suo motu case. In such a case, the Court takes up the matter on its own. This one concerns the appointment of judicial and technical members and weak infrastructure at the NCLT. The Bench observed orally that the NCLT's administration had been taken over by the Ministry and that this was impinging on the institution's autonomy. It also said the Ministry appeared to want complete control.
Mint reported that it had sought the Ministry's comment and that a response was awaited when it published.
What did the Court direct?
- Proposals: The presidents of the NCLT and NCLAT must submit comprehensive proposals on infrastructure, buildings and staff within four weeks. These may cover land, buildings and supporting staff.
- Record-keeping: The NCLT is to consider whether every bench should have an officer of Deputy or Joint Registrar rank to maintain judicial records.
- Union government: The Attorney General was asked to press the Union to provide basic amenities at the earliest. The Centre was also asked to meet the stakeholders, after the Attorney General, R Venkataramani, proposed a joint meeting of the government, tribunal leadership and the Bar.
The staffing dispute
A counsel in a connected petition said the Ministry had awarded a contract on 6 October to a foreign company operating in India to deploy administrative personnel. These include Deputy Registrars, Assistant Registrars and stenographers. It was argued that existing contractual employees could be displaced from 1 or 2 November.
The Court declined to give these employees interim protection merely because of their length of service. It said the NCLT President should make the reference and that the entire power of appointment must lie with the President. It also suggested bringing in experienced government officials on deputation first, followed by phased regular recruitment. The Court issued notice in the connected petition and said it would look at the issue from the wider public interest.
The numbers before the Court
| Issue | Figure reported |
|---|---|
| Regular administrative posts filled | 67 of 320 (253 vacant) |
| Vacancies among judicial and technical members | 16 |
| Sanctioned strength of members | 63 |
| Members as of 30 June 2026 | 26 judicial and 25 technical, including the president |
| Benches holding half-day sittings | At least 18, per the NCLT Bar Association |
Senior Advocate Sanjiv Sen, for the NCLT Bar Association, said two floors of the Principal Bench in Delhi had been shut and all courts were working at half strength. The Bar Association also raised concerns about 246 proposed support staff positions that had not been operationalised, and about outages of the document management system.
Why does it matter legally?
The NCLT hears insolvency matters under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and disputes under the Companies Act, 2013. The Bench voiced concern that insolvency cases were being prioritised, delaying Companies Act matters. An IBBI report cited by Mint said ongoing corporate insolvency processes averaged 713 days as of March 2025, and around 78% exceeded the statutory 270-day timeline.
Who is affected, and what should you do?
Companies, creditors, promoters and lawyers with matters before the NCLT may continue to see delays until staffing and infrastructure improve. There is no new rule or compliance step for litigants. Check your listing dates with your counsel, as the proposals are due in about four weeks and the matter is still developing.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Supreme Court's remark a final ruling?
No. The remarks were made orally during a hearing. The Court has asked for proposals and issued notice in a connected petition, so the matter is still pending.
What will happen to contractual NCLT staff?
The Court declined interim protection based only on length of service. It said it would examine the outsourcing issue from the larger public interest.
Who must submit the proposals?
The presidents of the NCLT and the NCLAT, within four weeks.
Sources
- The Hindu: Supreme Court directs NCLAT, NCLT presidents to submit proposals on infrastructure, staff requirements
- Bar & Bench: NCLT administration completely hijacked by Ministry of Corporate Affairs: Supreme Court
- Mint: 'Completely hijacked': Supreme Court rebukes corporate affairs ministry over NCLT autonomy