Punjab and Haryana: At the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Chandigarh Bench, a heated exchange between a judicial member and a technical member has brought to light the underlying tensions and operational challenges faced by the tribunal. This altercation, witnessed by lawyers present during the session, underscores the complexities of integrating professionals from diverse backgrounds into the judiciary system and highlights the practical difficulties encountered in the day-to-day functioning of the tribunal.
A lawyer, who chose to remain anonymous, shared insights with media about the recurrent disagreements between the two members, indicating that this was not an isolated incident. The discord stems, in part, from the differing professional cultures and expectations associated with judicial and non-judicial roles.
The video of the courtroom shows the Member (Judicial) Dr. Patibandla Satyanarayana Prasad and Member (Technical) Umesh Kumar Shukla argue over the way the latter conducts the cases.
“What is this? Everyday you are doing this. There should be some limit. You can’t do this everyday. I am tolerating you to a large extent…,” Prasad is seen telling Shukla in the 3 minute and 22 second-long video.
While Shukla’s response is not audible in the video, Prasad is also heard telling Shukla the following,
“You ask anybody in the bar…Everyday you unnecessarily … people. Whatever clarification you want, you read. He [counsel] will comply with it, that is all, there ends the matter. ‘I want to do this, you want to do this’, don’t say that.”
The exchange also seems to turn into a confrontation when Prasad tells Shukla that he is the controller of the court and not him.
“I am the controller of the court, not you. [A] Judicial member is the controller of the Court … you rake up the matter to any extent. You don’t talk like this. I am tolerating you to a greater extent. I have tolerated you till date to so much extent. Every time you don’t understand.”
Finally, Prasad is heard advising Shukla that he has to work with the Judicial Member.
“This is not the way. Kindly mend your behavior,” Prasad is seen saying.
A senior lawyer from Chandigarh provided further context, explaining the adjustment challenges faced by technical members who transition from administrative or non-judicial careers to the bench.
“A technical member is from a non-judicial background. He throughout his career has been on the administrative side of the service and has now been elevated to the bench. Now the respect you get is different and you have to change the way you would ask questions while in office. While you are on bench, you have to be more subtle and cautious of how many questions you are putting,”
-the lawyer elucidated.
This incident also casts a spotlight on the logistical hurdles at the NCLT’s Chandigarh Bench. Currently, the tribunal operates with only one functional courtroom, despite having two courts. This arrangement forces Court-1 to conduct its sessions in the morning, while Court-2 can only commence its proceedings at 2 PM. This limitation not only constrains the tribunal’s capacity to handle cases but also pressures members to manage their time and caseloads efficiently.
ALSO READ: Bombay High Court: Breaking Marriage Promise Due to Parental “NO” Does Not Amount to Rape
“When you have just the half day, obviously the controller of the court i.e., judicial member, wants to continue with the cause list in the most swift manner. A judicial member will understand that there may be certain queries in your mind but this is not the right time because eventually it is going to be adjourned as pleadings are not complete. The judicial member would prefer utilising the time in those cases which are complete,”
-another lawyer commented.
The friction between the judicial and technical members at the NCLT Chandigarh Bench serves as a microcosm of the broader challenges facing India’s legal institutions as they strive to incorporate expertise from various fields to enhance the adjudication process. Moreover, the operational issues at the tribunal underscore the need for infrastructural improvements to ensure that the judiciary can function effectively and efficiently. As the legal community and stakeholders reflect on these incidents, the focus turns towards finding solutions that can harmonize the diverse elements within the judiciary and address the practical challenges that hinder its operations.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
