Delhi High Court Orders Expeditious Implementation of Supreme Court Directions Concerning NCLT & NCLAT
The Single Bench of Justice Pratibha M Singh of Delhi High Court, while considering that more than three months have passed since the rendering of the Supreme Court judgment in Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Anr, 2020 SCC Online SC 962. (“Judgement”) has recently emphasized the expeditious implementation of the directions in the same way regarding setting up of “National Tribunals Commission” & “Tribunal’s Wing” in the Ministry of Finance.
In the present matter, the Petitioner, a practicing advocate, filed a petition seeking for issuance of directions to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (“MCA”) and the NCLT to assess the requirement of the number of tribunals of the NCLT and for formulation this Court to formulate a rolling recruitment plan for the NCLT.
The Petitioner contended for the constitution of NCLT Benches in all States and highlighted the current statistics of 19 judicial members & 22 technical members. Further, it was also submitted that there had been considerable delay in the appointments to the NCLT & NCLAT despite a heavy load of cases.
On the other hand, the respondent took a preliminary objection and submitted that the issues raised in this petition had been covered fully by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Anr, 2020 SCC Online SC 962. Reference was made to the relevant paragraphs of the judgment and the concluding paragraphs where the Apex Court directed for the formation of a `National Tribunals Commission’ to take care of tribunals' administrative and infrastructural needs. The Court, further while setting up the Commission as an interregnum measure, provided for a separate `Tribunals wing’ in the Ministry of Finance. The Ld Counsel also submitted that the directions regarding all the tribunals with specific reference to NCLT & NCLAT have already been passed in the judgment.
Thus the Bench while relying on the Judgement to dispose of the petition observed that, “This Court has perused the judgment of the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association (supra). Clearly, the judgment covers the issues which have been raised by the Petitioner, including in respect of appointments to Tribunals, enquiries against members, monitoring of the functioning and the filling up of vacancies in Tribunals, as well as assessment of the workload and providing all adequate infrastructure.”
Case Title: R Subramanian V. Union of India Represented Through The Secretary Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Ors