Relevance: GS-2: Statutory, regulatory and various quasi-judicial bodies.

Key Phrases: ab initio void, 42nd Amendment Act, Swaran Singh Committee, decentralized, inexpensive, quasi-judicial, National Tribunals Commission, flexibility, Extra-judicial arrangement, Central Administration Tribunal

Why in News?

• Supreme Court set aside an order of the Calcutta High Court, which quashed a ruling of the Central Administrative Tribunal in Delhi related to a case filed by former West Bengal chief secretary Alapan Bandopadhyay,
• Supreme Court has stated that the HC’s remarks were “wholly unnecessary” and stated that this order was “passed without jurisdiction” and was “ab initio void (legally void from inception)”.
• A senior IAS officer has been the subject of a tussle between the Centre and the state government over the last few days.
• The issue is related to disciplinary proceedings against Alapan Bandopadhyay after he skipped a cyclone review meeting chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in West Bengal's Medinipur district in May 2021

Tribunal System in India:

• Tribunals are not originally a part of the Constitution of India. The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 introduced these provisions in accordance with the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee.
• Need:
  • Tribunals were constituted with the objective of delivering speedy, inexpensive and decentralized adjudication of disputes in various matters.
  • Tribunals are created to avoid the regular courts’ route for dispensation of disputes.
  • Some tribunals are specialized government agencies like boards and they also have decision-making powers conferred upon them by law.
• The 42nd Amendment introduced Part XIV-A to the Constitution. This Part is called ‘Tribunals’. It contains two articles.
  • Article 323A: Administrative Tribunals.
    • Administrative tribunals are quasi-judicial institutions that resolve disputes related to the recruitment and service conditions of persons engaged in public service.
    • Article 323A provides for this and the Central Administrative Tribunal was created under this Section.
  • Article 323B: Tribunals for other subjects such as:
    • Taxation
    • Industrial and labor
    • Foreign exchange, import and export
    • Land reforms
    • Food
    • The ceiling on urban property
    • Elections to Parliament and state legislatures
    • Rent and tenancy rights

Administrative Tribunals Act ,1985

Under Article 323A, the Parliament enacted the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to provide for the establishment of Administrative Tribunals for the Union and a separate Administrative Tribunal for a State or a Joint Administrative Tribunal for two or more States .

Purpose: adjudication or trial of disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India or of any corporation or society owned or control by the Government. The objective for setting up of Administrative Tribunal is to provide speedy and inexpensive justice to the employees on their grievances relating to service matters. Rules have been framed for smooth implementation of provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

Tribunal vs Court:

Role of tribunals in the Indian judicial system:

• Quick resolution: Tribunals were set up to reduce the workload of courts, to expedite decisions, increase the outreach of justice and to provide a forum which would consist of both lawyers and experts in the areas falling under the jurisdiction of the tribunal. Since the tribunal procedure is not so complex, it is easy to decide the matters quickly and efficiently.
• Accessibility: The tribunals take less time to solve the cases as compared to the ordinary courts. As a result, the expenses are reduced. On the other hand, the ordinary courts are cumbersome and slow-going, thus making litigation Therefore, the administrative tribunals are cheaper than ordinary courts.
• Quality Justice: If we consider the present scenario, the tribunals are the best and the most effective method of providing adequate and quality justice in less time. Tribunals have expert members to deal with specific subject matters e.g. NCLT has experts in tax, NGT has environmental experts etc.
• Reduced burden of Courts: The system of administrative adjudication has lowered down the burden of the cases on the ordinary courts. A law commission report says that the top five central tribunals in India have taken over 3.50 lakh cases pending from the judiciary.
• Flexibility: The introduction of tribunals engendered flexibility and versatility in the judicial system of India. Unlike the procedures of the ordinary court which are stringent and inflexible, the administrative tribunals have a quite informal and easy-going procedure.

Issues related to tribunals in the Indian judicial system:

• Haphazard growth: They have grown haphazardly with lack of any overarching plan. Different tribunals constituted under different enactments are administered by different administrative departments of Central and the State Governments.
• More delay: Tribunals have been criticized for poor judgments resulting in the case reaching SC and HCs, leading to more delay.
• Impartiality: There are doubts about impartiality as tribunals act as extended arm of departments with retired bureaucrats appointed to it with fewer judges.
• Against separation of powers: With growth in the number of tribunals has led to transfer of judicial powers to the executive which is against separation of power and judicial independence.
• Lack of clear understanding: As tribunals do not follow any uniform procedures but principles of natural justice, adjudicators are unable to have a clear understanding of the procedures to be followed.

Important Supreme Court Judgements on Tribunals System:

• L. Chandra Kumar versus Union of India and Ors, 1997
  • Such tribunals will act as courts of first instance in respect of areas of law for which they have been constituted. However, decisions of these tribunals will be subject to scrutiny by a division bench of the High Court within whose jurisdiction the concerned tribunal falls.
  • For a tribunal substituting a High Court, any weightage in favor of non-judicial members would render the tribunal less effective and potent than the High Court.
  • Only persons with judicial experience should be appointed to tribunals.
• Madras Bar Association versus Union of India, 2020
  • National Tribunals Commission should be set up to supervise appointments, as well as functioning and administration of tribunals.
  • Members will have a term of five years instead of four years. Members will be allowed to hold office till they reach 67 years of age (instead of 65).

Conclusion

• Tribunals offer relief to the ordinary courts that are already overburdened with suits. However, some reforms are required in order to enable their smooth, efficient, transparent and accountable functioning.
• Also, Tribunals are an essential extra-judicial arrangement because they are helpful in many ways. Tribunals offer flexibility when compared to ordinary courts that have to adhere to strict procedures. They are cheaper and offer speedy justice.
• The procedure followed by the tribunals is simple and easy to understand even for the layman. They also offer relief to the ordinary courts that are already overburdened with suits. However, some reforms are required in order to enable their smooth, efficient, transparent and accountable functioning.

Sources: The Hindu , Indian Express , PRS India , The wire

Mains Question:

Q. In light of the recent West Bengal Chief Secretary and Central Administrative Tribunal fiasco, briefly describe the constitutional provisions related to tribunals system in India. Critically analyze the role of administrative tribunals in the Indian judicial system?