ON
← Back to feed
NCLT, NCLAT hijacked by corporate affairs ministry: Supreme Court
India🏛️ PoliticsCenter

NCLT, NCLAT hijacked by corporate affairs ministry: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India sharply criticized the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for undermining the independence of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). Chief Justice Surya Kant stated that the ministry has effectively 'hijacked' these quasi-judicial bodies, compromising their autonomy through excessive administrative control. The court highlighted severe operational issues, including deteriorating infrastructure, collapsing roofs in some facilities, and significant staffing shortages, noting that 253 out of 320 regular positions in the NCLT remain vacant. While acknowledging the need for proper recruitment processes via statutory commissions rather than direct contractual hiring, the bench refused to intervene directly in ongoing employment disputes involving contract staff. Instead, the court ordered the heads of both tribunals to submit detailed proposals regarding infrastructure improvements and staffing solutions within four weeks.

The Supreme Court declared on Thursday that the administration of the National Company Law Tribunal and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal had been completely hijacked by the Union ministry of corporate affairs. A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant warned that the ministry’s attempt to exert control over these quasi-judicial bodies was undermining their autonomy and daily functioning. The court stated that the ministry sought a complete grip over the institutions, a situation the judges described as most unfortunate. The bench included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. They were hearing a suo motu case regarding infrastructure deficiencies, staff shortages, and administrative difficulties affecting both tribunals. The court emphasized that the presidents of the NCLT and NCLAT must be permitted to administer their respective institutions independently. The bench instructed that the entire power of appointment for personnel should rest solely with the presidents. They rejected arguments for protecting existing contractual employees based on tenure alone. Instead, the court indicated that recruitment must occur through proper channels, specifically mentioning the Union Public Service Commission or the Staff Selection Commission. The judges noted that contractual employment often represents a backdoor entry into the system. Senior advocate Sanjiv Sen, appearing for the NCLT Bar Association, highlighted the deteriorating physical condition of the tribunal’s principal bench in Delhi. He reported that roofs were collapsing and that the seventh and eighth floors of the main building had been shut down due to safety concerns. Consequently, all courts within the facility were operating at half strength. Sen described the situation as being in shambles. The court accepted these reports of infrastructure failure as part of the broader administrative crisis. The staffing crisis at the NCLT is severe. Out of 320 sanctioned regular administrative posts, only 67 have been filled, leaving 253 vacancies. Additionally, 16 positions for judicial and technical members remain unfilled. Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora informed the bench that the ministry had outsourced the recruitment of administrative personnel to a foreign company operating in India. This contract, awarded on October 6, involves deploying staff such as deputy registrars, assistant registrars, and stenographers. Arora argued that this arrangement could displace existing contractual employees starting November 1 or 2. She contended that these employees had served for eight years and should not be terminated abruptly. Chief Justice Kant responded firmly to these claims. He stated that the court would not intervene to keep contractual staff in position simply because they had served for several years. Nor would the court allow private contractors to dictate staffing arrangements for a judicial institution. The judge cited specific incidents of misconduct by contractual staff, including cases where original files were removed and criminal complaints were registered. He mentioned that in Bombay, contractual employees had taken original documents, leading to First Information Reports being filed. The bench concluded that current and past contractual employees should be released, allowing the tribunal presidents to manage future hiring autonomously. Attorney General R Venkataramani, representing the central government, informed the court that recommendations for new appointments were currently in the pipeline. He proposed a joint meeting involving government representatives, the NCLT president, and other relevant parties to address the issues. The court directed the presidents of both the NCLT and NCLAT to submit detailed proposals regarding infrastructure and staffing within four weeks. These proposals should include requirements for land, buildings, and the secure keeping of records. The tribunal handles critical matters including corporate civil disputes, company law violations, and insolvency proceedings. During the financial year 2024-25, the NCLT approved resolution plans valued at 55,000 crore rupees. Despite this volume of high-stakes work, the institution faces significant operational hurdles. The court’s intervention aims to restore institutional independence and ensure that the heads of these tribunals can effectively suggest ways to smooth and strengthen their day-to-day operations. The focus remains on eliminating external interference in administrative decisions and addressing the immediate need for functional infrastructure and adequate staffing levels.

How this report was made. Objective News wrote this report from 2 source articles, using AI-assisted synthesis under our methodology. It is our own text, not a copy of any single outlet. Read our methodology.

Responsible editor: Matej BašaSpotted an error? Report it

2 reports

Hindustan Times logoHindustan TimesIndependentCenterFactual 92Objective 85
National Company Law Tribunal administration ‘completely hijacked’ by corporate affairs ministry: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India issued strong criticism against the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MoCA), stating that the ministry has 'completely hijacked' the administration of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). In a suo motu case addressing infrastructure deficits and staff shortages, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant warned that MoCA’s attempts to exert control undermine the tribunal’s constitutional autonomy. The court highlighted severe understaffing, noting that 253 out of 320 sanctioned administrative posts and 16 judicial or technical member positions remain vacant. Additionally, the bench objected to the ministry outsourcing the recruitment of administrative staff to a private firm, ruling that the authority to appoint personnel must reside solely with the NCLT President rather than external contractors or the ministry.

Bias read (Center): The article reports on a high-profile legal dispute between two state institutions (the Judiciary and the Executive) regarding institutional autonomy. The tone is strictly factual, relying heavily on direct quotes from the Supreme Court bench to convey the severity of the situation ('completely hijk

Why factuality (92): Accurately reflects the core facts: the specific quote 'completely hijacked', the bench composition (CJI Surya Kant, J. Bagchi, J. Mohana), the nature of the suo motu case, and the specific statistic regarding administrative vacancies (67 filled out of 320). It aligns perfectly with the cross-source

Why objectivity (85): Maintains a standard journalistic tone. While it uses strong quotes from the Court ('hijacked'), the narrative itself remains descriptive rather than interpretive. It presents the Court's criticism as reported speech without adding editorial adjectives like 'shocking' or 'embarrassing'.

Times of India logoTimes of IndiaIndependentCenterFactual 90Objective 65
NCLT, NCLAT hijacked by corporate affairs ministry: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India sharply criticized the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for undermining the independence of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). Chief Justice Surya Kant stated that the ministry has effectively 'hijacked' these quasi-judicial bodies, compromising their autonomy through excessive administrative control. The court highlighted severe operational issues, including deteriorating infrastructure, collapsing roofs in some facilities, and significant staffing shortages, noting that 253 out of 320 regular positions in the NCLT remain vacant. While acknowledging the need for proper recruitment processes via statutory commissions rather than direct contractual hiring, the bench refused to intervene directly in ongoing employment disputes involving contract staff. Instead, the court ordered the heads of both tribunals to submit detailed proposals regarding infrastructure improvements and staffing solutions within four weeks.

Bias read (Center): The article reports on a high-profile legal confrontation between the judiciary and the executive branch, specifically focusing on the Supreme Court's criticism of the government's management of regulatory tribunals. The tone remains largely objective, quoting the Chief Justice’s strong language ('h

Why factuality (90): Factually sound regarding the main event, the quote, and the bench composition. Adds specific details not in Article 0 (e.g., Rs 55,000 crore resolution value, roof collapse claim), which appear plausible but cannot be verified against the truncated text. Consistent with the general consensus of the

Why objectivity (65): Significantly less objective due to loaded language and editorializing. Phrases like 'outburst sure to embarrass the govt,' 'stinging remarks,' and 'shoddy infrastructure' inject clear bias and emotional judgment. The framing is sensationalist compared to the neutral reporting in Article 0.

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €4/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories