48
Vacancies, staffing shortages, structural risks and delayed insolvency cases expose institutional strain
The Supreme Court’s sharp observations on Thursday that the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) had “completely hijacked” the administration of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) have brought the functioning of India’s corporate adjudication system under scrutiny, with the tribunals facing vacancies among judicial and technical members, a shortage of administrative personnel, mounting case pendency and questions over the professional backgrounds of those appointed to adjudicate corporate disputes.
A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana made the observations on 29 October while hearing a suo motu matter concerning the appointment of judicial and technical members and inadequate infrastructure in the NCLT. The court questioned the Ministry’s control over administrative appointments and said the tribunal’s President must have autonomy over its functioning. “We are compelled to observe this system is completely hijacked by Ministry of Corporate Affairs.
That is the problem. And that is impinging on the autonomy of the institution,” the Chief Justice observed, according to reports of the court proceedings. The Bench also said the entire power of appointment of staff should rest with the NCLT President. The observations came amid concerns over the Ministry’s decision to outsource the recruitment of administrative personnel to a private company.
The court suggested deputation of employees as an interim arrangement, followed by regular recruitment through the Union Public Service Commission or the Staff Selection Commission. It also issued notice to the Centre on a connected petition concerning the outsourcing arrangement. rate adjudication, facilitate the revival of financially distressed companies and protect creditors and other stakeholders through timebound proceedings.
The Bench directed the Presidents of the NCLT and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to submit comprehensive proposals within four weeks detailing their requirements relating to infrastructure, buildings, land and staffing. It also asked the NCLT to examine the need for an officer of Deputy Registrar or Joint Registrar rank at every bench to ensure proper maintenance of judicial records.
The NCLT and NCLAT were established to provide a specialised mechanism for resolving company-law disputes and insolvency matters, with the objective of reducing the burden on regular courts and ensuring quicker resolution of corporate disputes. The NCLT was constituted under the Companies Act, 2013, and formally established on 1 June 2016, following recommendations of the Justice Eradi Committee.
The NCLAT was also constituted under the Companies Act and became operational on the same date. The NCLT replaced the Company Law Board and took over functions previously exercised by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction and the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, besides certain company-law jurisdictions of the High Courts.
Following the enactment of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) in 2016, the NCLT was designated as the adjudicating authority for corporate insolvency cases. Unlike regular courts, the NCLT is a specialised quasijudicial body comprising judicial members with legal and judicial experience and technical members with professional expertise in areas such as accountancy, finance, management and corporate affairs.
The NCLAT functions as the appellate authority against NCLT orders, with further appeals to the Supreme Court on questions of law. The objective was to create a unified and specialised forum for corpoHowever, the tribunal’s own figures and submissions before the Supreme Court point to substantial capacity constraints. In a statement issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs through the Press Information Bureau on 8 October, the NCLT said that against a sanctioned strength of 62 members, in addition to the President, it had 48 members in position, leaving 14 vacancies.
The tribunal also said that 13 courts were functioning on a full-day basis while 18 were holding half-day sittings. Four additional members were due to demit office by the end of 2026. A subsequent affidavit filed by the NCLT Bar Association before the Supreme Court on 27 October , however, put the number of vacancies among judicial and technical members at 16. The association stated that the tribunal had a sanctioned strength of 63, comprising the President, 31 judicial members and 31 technical members.
It proposed increasing the strength to 121, comprising 60 judicial members, 60 technical members and the President, citing the expansion of the tribunal›s responsibilities following the introduction of the IBC. The shortage extends to administrative personnel. According to the Bar Association›s affidavit, only 67 of the 320 sanctioned regular administrative posts were occupied, leaving 253 vacant. Separately, 678 contractual personnel were working against a sanctioned contractual strength of 798.
The association argued that reliance on contractual employees affected continuity and institutional memory. The Bar Association also raised concerns over the condition of the NCLT›s premises at Block 3 of the CGO Complex in New Delhi. Its affidavit cited a September inspection report by the CSIR-Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee, which found serious deterioration in the terrace slab and structural reinforcement. According to the affidavit, reinforcement in columns and beams had corroded by more than 30 per cent and had been completely lost at certain locations.
The report recommended dismantling and recasting the affected slab, while the Central Public Works Department sought the vacation of the seventh floor, where two courts were functioning. In a separate affidavit before the court, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs said it had delegated full financial powers to the NCLT and NCLAT for office expenses and minor civil and electrical works.
The Ministry listed combined allocations of Rs 119.3 crore over the three financial years from 2024-25 to 2026-27. It also said the CPWD was undertaking an Rs 18.19-crore upgrade of the NCLT Principal Bench premises, covering approximately 43,000 square feet. The capacity constraints come at a time when the tribunals are dealing with substantial pendency. In a written reply to Rajya Sabha on 24 March 2026, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs provided bench-wise figures showing 14,961 cases pending before the NCLT and 3,518 before the NCLAT as of 31 March 31, 2025.
These figures covered cases including those under the IBC. The same parliamentary reply stated that 829 of the 969 cases in which resolution plans were approved under the IBC between financial years 2020-21 and 2024-25 had exceeded the statutory 330-day timeline. This means approximately 85.6 per cent of the cases in which resolution plans were approved during the five-year period took longer than the prescribed timeline.
The Ministry›s reply also provided the average time taken for insolvency resolution, excluding periods specifically excluded by the adjudicating authority. The average increased from 408 days in March 2021 to 451 days in March 2022, 507 days in March 2023, 562 days in March 2024 and 597 days in March 2025. The corresponding average time taken to reach a liquidation order increased from 352 days in March 2021 to 508 days in March 2025.
The Economic Survey 2025-26 separately reported that the average duration of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process stood at 713 days overall and 853 days for cases closed during 202425, against the statutory 330day timeline. It also cited an estimate of nearly 30,600 pending cases before the NCLT, with an estimated clearance period of nearly 10 years at the existing disposal rate.
The Survey drew on the December 2025 report of the Standing Committee on Finance. The Ministry, however, has also reported improvements in the tribunal›s disposal performance. In a statement issued on 8 October, it said the NCLT had approved 107 resolution plans between July and September 2026, its highest quarterly figure since the tribunal›s inception. The cumulative number of approved resolution plans had reached 1,735 as of 30 September, involving an aggregate approved plan value of approximately Rs 4.89 lakh crore.
At the same time, 294 resolution plans were awaiting consideration for approval as of 30 September, while orders had been reserved in another 41 matters, leaving 335 matters at these two stages. Apart from vacancies and pendency, the professional backgrounds of those appointed to the tribunals have also become a subject of examination. Official profiles published by the NCLT and NCLAT show that several technical members have previously held senior positions in the civil services, particularly the Indian Revenue Service, Indian Administrative Service and other government services.
Among the NCLT›s technical members, Atul Chaturvedi, who joined in November 2022, is a former IAS officer who retired as Secretary to the Government of India in July 2022. Umesh Kumar Shukla, who joined in July 2023, was an officer of the Indian Cost Accounts Service and superannuated on 30 June 2023, from the post of Chief Adviser Cost in the Ministry of Finance. His appointment followed 19 days after his retirement. Kavita Bhatnagar, who joined the NCLT on 20 January 2025, is a 1988-batch Indian Revenue Service officer who retired as Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat, after 34 years of service.
Reena Sinha Puri, another technical member appointed in January 2025, belongs to the 1987-batch IRS and had served as Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. Her official profile also records a law degree and a master›s degree in public policy. A similar pattern is visible among technical members of the NCLAT. Barun Mitra, a 1987-batch IAS officer, had served as Secretary in the Department of Justice and Union Law Secretary before joining the appellate tribunal. Naresh Salecha, an officer of the 1984-batch Indian Railway Accounts Service, had served as Member (Finance) of the Railway Board and ex-officio Secretary to the Government of India before joining the NCLAT on 17 May 2022.
His official profile records qualifications in commerce, law and management. Ajai Das Mehrotra, a 1984-batch Indian Revenue Service officer, retired as Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax in November 2020. He subsequently served as a member of the Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal and the NCLT before joining the NCLAT. Arun Baroka, an IAS officer, retired on 31 August 2023, as Secretary in the Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals.
He is also a technical member of the appellate tribunal. The NCLT›s current President, Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal, joined the tribunal on 11 May 2026, after retiring as a judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on 9 March 2026. The appointments are made under the statutory framework governing the tribunals. Section 409 of the Companies Act prescribes qualifications for judicial and technical members, including specified professional experience in fields such as law, accountancy, finance, management and corporate affairs.
The presence of retired government officials among the appointees does not by itself establish that their appointments were made as post-retirement benefits. Their qualifications and previous professional experience are part of the statutory eligibility framework. However, the composition of the tribunals has become a subject of debate within the legal fraternity. In an interview published by Bar & Bench on 26 October, NCLT Bar Association president Dr UK Chaudhary said the tribunal should not become a “dumping ground for retired bureaucrats”. He said that while he had nothing against competent retired IAS or IRS officers being appointed, some officials joined after retirement without sufficient time to understand the specialised jurisdiction.
He also argued that younger professionals, including chartered accountants, company secretaries and lawyers, should be considered for appointments. The question of professional experience also raises the issue of how the performance of individual members is assessed. The NCLT›s annual report for 2024-25 records institutional disposal figures, including 7,074 disposals out of 9,817 old and new Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process cases during the financial year.
The tribunal has also said that it conducts internal performance reviews and disposal monitoring. In its 8 October statement, the NCLT said it had strengthened the mechanism for collecting and monitoring pendency and disposal data across its 16 benches. The system, according to the Ministry›s statement, provides information on workload across benches and courts and enables redistribution of cases and better utilisation of judicial resources.
It also said that special benches had been constituted wherever required. However, the publicly accessible records reviewed for this report provide institutional, bench-wise and court-wise figures rather than a consolidated member-wise performance assessment. They do not provide a comprehensive public breakdown of the number of cases disposed of by each individual judicial or technical member, the number of orders reserved by each member, actual sitting hours or member-wise attendance.
The NCLT›s published figures of 13 full-day and 18 half-day courts indicate the extent of reduced court functioning, but do not establish how many hours each individual member spends hearing cases. Similarly, institutional disposal figures do not, by themselves, establish the individual productivity of members. The NCLT and NCLAT were created to bring specialised expertise and speed to corporate adjudication. While the government has documented thousands of insolvency resolutions and a record quarterly number of approvals, the continuing vacancies, shortage of permanent administrative staff and delays beyond the statutory timeline raise questions about how effectively the institutions are fulfilling their original mandate.