Supreme Court flags poor infrastructure at NCLT, NCLAT
The Supreme Court on Monday termed unacceptable the grossly inadequate infrastructure and large vacancies at the National Company Law Tribunal and appellate NCLAT, which daily handle Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code matters involving thousands of crores of rupees. A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the tribunals are the government's lifeline, examining nationalised banks and infrastructure projects. Senior advocate Sanjiv Sen, for the NCLT Bar Association, said leaking roofs, seepage and vacancies leave most Delhi benches sitting half a day.
Source
Times of India — Top · read the original report ↗
Desk check · compared with the source
What the desk checked (4)
- Supreme Court said infrastructure and vacancies at NCLT and NCLAT are unacceptable — Attributed in source to a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.
- The tribunals daily handle IBC matters involving thousands of crores of rupees — Stated in source as part of the court's observation; no figures or data cited.
- Leaking roofs, seepage and vacancies have restricted business hours at the Delhi NCLT building, with most benches sitting half a day — Attributed to senior advocate Sanjiv Sen for the NCLT Bar Association; source notes he 'claimed' the staff shortage.
- CJI asked how an institution can function without buildings, staff, judgment writers and adequate technology — Direct quote attributed to the CJI in the source.
Analysts’ view opinion
This is not really a story about leaking roofs — it is a political message from the Supreme Court about where the government has placed its priorities in economic governance. At a time when the insolvency law is showcased as a flagship reform, having the court say publicly that the tribunals enforcing it lack buildings, members and staff is an awkward contradiction. By calling these tribunals the "government's lifeline", the bench framed the demand as the executive's own self-interest rather than a judicial wish-list — a hard argument to push back against.
- Filling vacancies and funding infrastructure are squarely executive functions, which leaves the government little room to deflect responsibility.
- This is the latest round in a long-running judiciary-executive friction over tribunals, but framed around practical dysfunction rather than constitutional argument.
- If the Bar Association's claim that most benches sit only half a day holds up, the cost lands on banks and creditors through delayed insolvency resolution — turning this into an economic credibility issue.
- There is a defensible government side too: appointment processes and building allocation are slow, systemic problems — though no government response is recorded in this story.
- Politically, criticism coming from the court itself gives opposition voices a ready-made peg for the "institutions are being weakened" line.
What to watch — Watch whether the court asks the government for a time-bound affidavit on filling vacancies and upgrading premises, and how the finance and corporate affairs wings respond.
The story does not establish the actual number of vacancies, the government's explanation, or any specific direction issued by the court — so far there are only the Bar Association's submissions and the bench's oral remarks.
Deep dive
Research brief · 8 facts · 2 dates · exam-readyThe brief
Context
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and its appellate body, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), adjudicate company law and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) matters, including cases involving thousands of crores of rupees tied to banks and infrastructure projects. On Monday, the Supreme Court took note of complaints by the NCLT Bar Association that these tribunals work out of dilapidated buildings with leaking roofs, seepage, staff shortages and large member vacancies. A bench headed by the Chief Justice of India called the situation "unacceptable" and questioned the government on the absence of basic amenities.
Key facts
- The Supreme Court on Monday termed as unacceptable the grossly inadequate infrastructure and huge vacancies in the NCLT and NCLAT.
- The bench comprised CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.
- The court noted the two tribunals deal daily with Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code matters involving thousands of crores of rupees.
- The bench said the tribunals are the government's 'lifeline', with all nationalised banks, the banking sector and all infrastructure projects examined before them.
- Senior advocate Sanjiv Sen appeared for the NCLT Bar Association and said the tribunals function from dilapidated buildings.
- Sen said leaking roofs, persistent seepage and vacancies have severely restricted business hours in the NCLT building in Delhi, with most benches sitting for half a day.
- Sen also claimed a severe shortage of support staff is impeding adjudicatory functions of available members.
- The CJI asked how an institution can function without buildings, staff, judgment writers and adequate technological inclusion.
Timeline
- Monday (date not stated in the source)NCLT Bar Association, through senior advocate Sanjiv Sen, flags dilapidated buildings, leaking roofs, seepage, member vacancies and staff shortage before the Supreme Court.
- Same hearingBench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana calls the situation unacceptable and questions the government on basic amenities.
Who has a stake
- NCLT and NCLAT — Adjudicatory capacity hampered by poor buildings, member vacancies, lack of support staff and judgment writers.
- Supreme Court bench (CJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi, V Mohana) — Overseeing tribunal functioning and pressing the government to provide basic infrastructure.
- Union government — Responsible for providing buildings, staff, technology and filling member vacancies in the tribunals.
- NCLT Bar Association — Petitioner voice of practising advocates; restricted business hours affect case hearings and clients.
- Nationalised banks and the banking sector — Their insolvency and recovery matters worth thousands of crores are decided by these tribunals.
- Infrastructure project promoters and creditors — Delays in adjudication stall resolution of stressed projects and locked-up capital.
Why it matters
The NCLT and NCLAT are the backbone of India's insolvency resolution architecture, deciding matters that affect bank balance sheets and stalled infrastructure projects worth thousands of crores. If benches sit for only half a day because of leaking roofs, staff shortages and vacant member posts, resolution timelines slip and creditors' recoveries suffer. The Supreme Court's remarks put the onus on the government to treat tribunal infrastructure as an economic, not merely administrative, priority.
UPSC angle
Prelims pointers
- NCLT is the tribunal that adjudicates company law and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) matters; NCLAT is its appellate body.
- The Supreme Court bench in this matter: CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana.
- Senior advocate Sanjiv Sen appeared for the NCLT Bar Association.
- Complaint cited: leaking roofs, persistent seepage, member vacancies and support staff shortage at the NCLT building in Delhi.
- Court observation: most Delhi NCLT benches sit only for half a day.
Mains framing
The Supreme Court's censure of infrastructure deficits and vacancies at the NCLT and NCLAT highlights a structural weakness in India's tribunalised justice system: adjudicatory bodies entrusted with high-value economic disputes under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code remain dependent on the executive for buildings, staff, judgment writers and technology. As the bench noted, these tribunals are the government's "lifeline", since nationalised banks, the wider banking sector and infrastructure projects come up for examination before them; yet dilapidated premises with leaking roofs and seepage, coupled with large member vacancies and a severe shortage of support staff, have reduced most Delhi benches to half-day sittings. The implications are economic as much as legal, because restricted hearing time translates into delayed resolution of stressed assets and blocked credit. The way forward, consistent with the court's questions, lies in the government ensuring basic amenities, timely filling of member posts, adequate registry and judgment-writing support, and proper technological inclusion so that tribunal capacity matches the value and volume of matters before it.
Key terms
- NCLT (National Company Law Tribunal)
- Tribunal that adjudicates company law and insolvency matters, including cases involving thousands of crores of rupees.
- NCLAT
- The appellate tribunal that hears appeals against NCLT orders.
- Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)
- The law under which insolvency and bankruptcy matters are dealt with daily by NCLT and NCLAT.
- NCLT Bar Association
- Body of advocates practising before the tribunal; it raised the infrastructure and vacancy concerns in court.
- Judgment writers
- Support staff who assist members in drafting orders; their absence was flagged by the CJI.
Practice questions
- Discuss how infrastructure deficits and member vacancies in tribunals such as the NCLT and NCLAT undermine the objectives of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
- Tribunals depend on the executive for funds, staff and premises. Examine the implications of this dependence for institutional independence and timely adjudication.
- Why did the Supreme Court describe the NCLT and NCLAT as the government's 'lifeline'? Analyse the economic significance of these tribunals.
Grounded only in the source report — figures and dates are the source's, not inferred.