Tribunal infrastructure at the NCLT and NCLAT came under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny again on Thursday, with the Court asking the Presidents of both tribunals for comprehensive proposals on land, buildings and staffing.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday (October 29) sought comprehensive proposals from the Presidents of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on the land, buildings and staff needed to strengthen the tribunals’ day-to-day functioning, and asked the Union to take steps for a meeting with all stakeholders [In Re: Appointment of Judicial and Technical Members and Inadequate Infrastructure in NCLT and Ancillary Issues].
The suo motu matter was heard by a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. Attorney General R Venkataramani appeared for the Union, while Senior Advocates Sanjiv Sen and Shikhil Suri addressed the Court for the Bar.
How the case reached here
The Supreme Court registered the suo motu case in May 2026, after its April 29 judgment in AVJ Heightss Apartment Owners Association v. IIFL Finance Ltd, delivered by Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan, flagged the shortage of members and facilities at the tribunals that handle insolvency and company law cases. When the matter was taken up on September 21, the CJI asked how the tribunals would work without infrastructure and called the NCLT and NCLAT a lifeline for the Government.
On that date, the Court directed the Centre to file a status report listing the amenities at the NCLT’s Principal and Regional Benches and to identify, in consultation with the NCLT President, the facilities needed urgently. The NCLT Principal Bench Bar Association, which intervened through Senior Advocate Sanjiv Sen, was asked to collect data on regional benches in tabulated form. The NCLT has a sanctioned strength of 63 members; as of June 30, 2026, it had 26 judicial members, 25 technical members and the President, and several benches have been sitting for half days.
Government proposes joint meeting
Opening the hearing, the Attorney General told the Bench that the Government’s status report had been shared with the NCLT, and proposed a joint meeting of the NCLT President, the Government and the Bar to prioritise the matters that needed immediate attention.
Bar says infrastructure is collapsing
Senior Advocate Sanjiv Sen said such a meeting should already have taken place in the month since the Court’s last order. He told the Bench:
Infrastructure is collapsing. The seventh and eighth floors of the Principal Bench are shut; courts are functioning at half strength.
Senior Advocate Shikhil Suri suggested a graded approach, with immediate, medium-term and long-term measures, so that the requirements placed before the Court could be sorted by urgency.
Vacancies and the ‘magic wand’
When Sen pointed out that some members had retired this month and others were due to retire, the CJI said that was a different issue and the Court would not mix up retirements with infrastructure.
Sen then said there were sixteen vacancies at present. The CJI replied that the selection had been made keeping even anticipated vacancies in view.
Sen said that probably concerned the 2024 notification and not vacancies that had arisen in the past two years or were likely to arise. The CJI responded:
Everybody wants a magic wand and everything to happen tomorrow itself.
What the Court directed
Besides the proposals on land, buildings and staffing, the Court said the NCLT will also examine whether a Deputy Registrar or Joint Registrar is needed at each bench to maintain judicial records. The information has been sought within four weeks, and the Attorney General has been asked to press the Union to provide basic amenities at the earliest.
When Sen said the meeting suggested by the Attorney General could be held in the meantime, the CJI said the Union should take steps for a meeting with the stakeholders.
The Attorney General suggested a pre-hearing meeting to narrow down the issues that needed to be addressed, and Suri said the Bar would be happy to give constructive suggestions to him. The next date of hearing was not available at the time of writing.
Why the hearing matters
The NCLT and NCLAT decide insolvency resolutions, company law disputes and liquidations, and delays there hold up recoveries for banks, homebuyers and operational creditors. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code sets timelines for the resolution process, but those timelines depend on benches that have enough members, courtrooms and registry staff.
By asking the tribunal heads themselves for detailed proposals on land, buildings and staff, and by asking the Union to convene the stakeholders, the Court has moved the case from general concern to specific, time-bound inputs that it can test at the next hearing.
Case Title: In Re: Appointment of Judicial and Technical Members and Inadequate Infrastructure in National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and Ancillary Issues (Suo Motu)
Bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana
Date of Hearing: October 29, 2026
Appearances: Attorney General R Venkataramani for the Union; Senior Advocates Sanjiv Sen and Shikhil Suri for the Bar