NCLT.
Filing System at NCLT Allahabad Bench: PRAYAGRAJ — The Company Law Tribunal Bar Association has moved the Allahabad High Court to contest a new regulatory framework that it claims has crippled the functioning of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Allahabad Bench. The petition alleges that a “discriminatory” filing system is causing systemic delays, leaving urgent insolvency and corporate matters in a state of procedural limbo.
At the heart of the dispute is a notice issued on 27 February 2026 by the Registrar of the NCLT Principal Bench. The notice introduced a bifurcated system for the threshold scrutiny of new filings—a move the Bar Association describes as both arbitrary and legally unsubstantiated.
The Core Conflict: Local vs. Central Scrutiny
The petition highlights a stark disparity in how different NCLT benches are managed. While certain benches, such as the one in Jaipur, have been permitted to conduct “local scrutiny” of filings at their own level, the Allahabad Bench has been subjected to a different regime.
Under this current arrangement, filings in Allahabad are handled through a Principal Bench mechanism rather than locally. The Bar Association argues this creates an unequal playing field:
-
Lack of Transparency: The petition states the notice is silent on why Jaipur enjoys local autonomy while Allahabad does not.
-
Absence of Statutory Backing: Advocates for the Bar Association argue that a Registrar, acting as an administrative authority, lacks the power to unilaterally overhaul procedural frameworks without explicit statutory authorisation.
“Piecemeal” Objections and Procedural Harassment
The practical fallout of this system, according to the plea, is a “bottleneck” that prevents cases from even being numbered or listed. Advocates practising before the tribunal have reported a frustrating cycle of “piecemeal” defect-marking.
“Matters remain pending at the scrutiny stage for long periods… In several instances, objections are being raised repeatedly and piecemeal, after earlier defects have already been cured, thereby forcing repeated re-filing and repeated follow-up,” the plea explains.
This repetitive cycle has led to:
-
Systemic Delays: Cases are stuck at the threshold for weeks or months.
-
Financial Hardship: Litigants face mounting expenses due to constant refiling.
-
Threat to Urgency: Time-sensitive insolvency matters under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) are being compromised by administrative red tape.
READ: SBI Funds IPO: Cleary Gottlieb, Hogan Lovells, CAM, SAM, Linklaters, S&R Associates Advise Investors
Impact on the Corporate Ecosystem
The Bar Association contends that these inefficiencies are more than mere administrative hurdles; they represent a breakdown in the predictability and consistency required for company law.
In its submission to the High Court, the Association noted that the current checking mechanism is “overly burdensome” and lacks the objective criteria necessary for practitioners to ensure compliance. Instead of streamlining the process, the new framework has allegedly turned the scrutiny stage into a source of “unnecessary harassment” for both litigants and their advocates.
READ: Allahabad High Court Upholds 10-Month NSA Detention Over Navratri Cattle Slaughter
The petition seeks to quash the 27 February notice and restore a more equitable filing process for the Allahabad Bench. As the Allahabad High Court prepares to hear the matter, the legal community is watching closely. The outcome could determine the extent of administrative power held by the NCLT Principal Bench over regional chapters and whether “local scrutiny” will become the standard across all Indian tribunals to ensure the “ease of doing business” remains a reality rather than just a slogan.
READ: Lawyers Push Back: Allahabad HC Bar Fights Plan to Make Courts Work Two Saturdays a Month
