The Supreme Court strongly criticised the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) over its control of NCLT and NCLAT staffing, observing that the arrangement was undermining the tribunals' independence. CJI Surya Kant called for greater autonomy in appointments and suggested government deputations followed by phased recruitment through UPSC or SSC.
The Supreme Court of India, on 29 October 2026, expressed serious concern over the Ministry of Corporate Affairs' (MCA) control over the administration and staff recruitment of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana made strong oral observations while examining issues concerning contractual employees, recruitment practices, staff shortages and institutional independence.
The Chief Justice remarked that the tribunal's administration had been "completely hijacked" by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, stating that such control was affecting its autonomy. The Court emphasised that the presidents of NCLT and NCLAT should have greater control over administrative appointments rather than depending on ministry-directed or outsourced recruitment.
The Bench suggested appointing experienced government officials on deputation as an immediate measure, followed by regular recruitment in phases with assistance from the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) or Staff Selection Commission (SSC).
The proceedings also highlighted serious staffing and infrastructure deficiencies. The Court was informed that only 67 of 320 sanctioned regular administrative posts at NCLT were filled, leaving 253 vacancies. Concerns were also raised regarding inadequate infrastructure and delays in handling corporate and insolvency matters.
The Supreme Court sought comprehensive proposals from the presidents of NCLT and NCLAT within four weeks concerning staffing, infrastructure and administrative requirements.
The observations have significant implications for corporate insolvency proceedings, company-law adjudication and the institutional independence of tribunals. The reported remarks were made during the hearing and should not be treated as final judicial findings against the MCA.
Source: CA Sansaar