Statutory employee dues must be scrutinized by the Adjudicating Authority during the Resolution Plan approval process.

The Appellants, representing employees of Winsome Yarns Ltd., challenged an order dated 28.11.2025 passed by the NCLT Chandigarh Bench in IA No. 855 of 2025.

The Appellants had sought relief regarding the admission of their claims, asserting that while they filed claims totaling ₹108,982,589, the Resolution Professional (RP) admitted only ₹60,776,629, despite company books allegedly reflecting approximately ₹9 crores.

Previously, on 30.10.2025, the NCLT had disposed of a related application (IA No. 1601/CH/2025) by observing that issues concerning Provident Fund (PF), Gratuity, and salary arrears would be considered at the time of the Resolution Plan's approval.

At the time of this appeal, the Resolution Plan had been approved by the Committee of Creditors on 09.03.2026 and was pending adjudication before the NCLT.

1. Whether the quantum of claims admitted by the Resolution Professional can be challenged as a grievance during the Resolution Plan approval stage if no prior application was filed against the RP's determination.

2. Whether the statutory dues of employees (Provident Fund, Gratuity, and Arrears) are sufficiently protected during the Resolution Plan adjudication process under the IBC.

Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), which mandates that the Adjudicating Authority ensure a Resolution Plan complies with statutory requirements, specifically Section 30(2)(b) regarding the payment of debts to operational creditors.

The principle that PF and Gratuity must be handled in terms of established Supreme Court precedents during the plan approval process.

The Tribunal held that the Appellants could not raise issues regarding the specific amount of claims admitted by the RP at the stage of plan approval, noting that no formal challenge or application was filed immediately after the RP finalized the claim admissions.

The Tribunal emphasized the finality of admitted claims in the absence of a timely challenge.

Regarding the payment of PF, Gratuity, and salary, the Tribunal relied on the NCLT’s prior observation from 30.10.2025, which confirmed that these statutory dues must be scrutinized by the Adjudicating Authority (AA) while evaluating the Resolution Plan's compliance.

The NCLAT reasoned that the AA is legally bound to verify that the plan meets the requirements of Section 30(2) and the relevant statutory regulations, thereby providing a safeguard for the employees' interests without the need for a separate intervention.

The Tribunal held that the Adjudicating Authority must consider the plan approval application in strict accordance with Section 30(2) of the IBC and the observations made in the order dated 30.10.2025 regarding the payment of PF, Gratuity, and salary arrears.