New Delhi: Dr. UK Chaudhary, President of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Bar Association, has called for comprehensive reforms in the appointment and functioning of the NCLT, emphasising that the specialised tribunal should prioritise professional competence, relevant expertise and judicial experience.
In an interview with Bar & Bench, Chaudhary discussed concerns relating to the quality of tribunal decisions, shortages of members, inadequate courtroom infrastructure, reappointment policies and changes to the insolvency resolution framework. He argued that the effectiveness of the NCLT depends significantly on the quality of its appointments and the resources made available to it.
Concerns Over Tribunal Appointments
Chaudhary questioned the accountability of the existing selection process, particularly when concerns are raised about the quality of NCLT judgments. He argued that the sitting President of the tribunal should be included in the selection committee because the President is familiar with the tribunal's jurisdiction and can assess candidates' suitability for the role.
He also criticised the practice of appointing retired bureaucrats without sufficient specialised experience. Clarifying his position, Chaudhary stated that he was not opposed to appointing retired Indian Administrative Service or Indian Revenue Service officers if they possessed the necessary competence. His concern was that some appointees may lack adequate time or experience to develop an understanding of the tribunal's specialised jurisdiction.
He advocated appointing younger professionals, including lawyers, chartered accountants and company secretaries, who have relevant knowledge of company law and insolvency proceedings.
Vacancies and Infrastructure Shortages
Chaudhary highlighted the shortage of tribunal members and operational courtrooms, stating that these deficiencies have affected the NCLT's ability to function efficiently. According to his interview, some benches have been operating for only half a day because of inadequate infrastructure and staffing.
He called for increasing the tribunal's sanctioned and working strength, estimating that at least 150 members would be required to handle company law disputes and insolvency proceedings effectively. He also emphasised the need for additional members and infrastructure at the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).
He attributed the continuing difficulties to shortcomings in appointments and infrastructure provision rather than placing the responsibility solely on the tribunal itself.
Reappointment and Continuity in Adjudication
Chaudhary expressed concern about the limited reappointment of eligible NCLT members, even where they have performed satisfactorily. He argued that experienced members should be considered for further terms in accordance with the applicable legal framework.
Greater continuity, he suggested, would help preserve institutional knowledge and reduce the disruption that can arise when a bench changes after reserving a matter for judgment.
Concerns Over Insolvency Law Reforms
The interview also addressed the 2026 amendments to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), including the proposed creditor-initiated insolvency resolution mechanism. Chaudhary questioned whether an insolvency process could realistically be completed within 14 days, particularly when notice, responses, hearings and arguments must be accommodated.
He stressed the importance of preparing the necessary rules, consulting stakeholders and assessing the practical implications of new procedures before implementation. His comments reflect concerns about balancing procedural speed with fairness and meaningful judicial consideration.
He also supported project-wise insolvency resolution in appropriate real estate cases, describing it as a development that can benefit homebuyers, commercial property buyers and other stakeholders by enabling individual projects to be completed.
Legal Significance
Chaudhary's remarks highlight broader questions about the institutional independence, competence and efficiency of specialised tribunals in India. The NCLT adjudicates disputes under the Companies Act, 2013, and acts as an adjudicating authority under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
The concerns raised in the interview demonstrate how appointments, tenure, infrastructure and procedural design can affect the administration of corporate justice. However, these are the views expressed by the NCLT Bar Association President in an interview and should not be treated as judicial findings or binding directions.
Source: Bar & Bench, interview with Dr. UK Chaudhary, President of the NCLT Bar Association.