Constitutional Provisions

Article 323A – Administrative Tribunals

• Exclusive provision for administrative tribunals.
• Parliament has the power to establish tribunals for:
  • Public service matters of the Centre and States.
• Parliament can:
  • Provide for establishment, jurisdiction, and procedure.
  • Exclude jurisdiction of all courts except SC.
• Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 was enacted under this provision.

Article 323B – Other Tribunals

Empowers Parliament and State Legislatures to establish tribunals for matters like:

• Taxation
• Industrial & labour disputes
• Land reforms
• Ceiling on urban property
• Elections
• Foodstuff
• Rent and tenancy rights

Administrative Tribunals (Under Article 323A)

Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)

• Established in 1985 under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
• Jurisdiction: Disputes and complaints regarding recruitment and service conditions of persons appointed under the Union Government.
• Does not cover:
  • Armed Forces
  • Officers of Judiciary
  • Officers of Judiciary

Features of CAT:

• Not bound by the procedure of Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
• Guided by principles of natural justice.
• Decisions are binding.
• Appeals lie only to the Supreme Court.

State Administrative Tribunals (SATs)

• Set up on request of State Governments.
• Similar powers and functions to CAT, but at the state level.

Joint Administrative Tribunals (JATs)

• Established for two or more states.
• Requires agreement between Centre and States concerned.

Features and Composition of Tribunals

• Chairman and Members appointed by the President (for CAT).
• Tenure, qualifications, and service conditions defined by Administrative Tribunals Act.
• Composition includes Judicial and Administrative members.

Tribunals vs. Courts

Multi-tiered appeals

• Lack of Independence – Executive involvement in appointments and administration.
• Delay in Appointments – Vacancies affect functioning.
• Lack of Uniformity – Different service conditions, eligibility criteria.
• Jurisdiction Conflicts – Between courts and tribunals.
• Limited Accessibility – Not easily accessible like regular courts.

Supreme Court Judgments

L. Chandra Kumar Case (1997)

• Declared unconstitutional the exclusion of High Court jurisdiction over tribunal decisions.
• Key Rulings:
  • Tribunals are supplementary, not substitutes for High Courts.
  • Tribunal decisions are subject to judicial review by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227.
  • Appeals from tribunals can go to High Courts, and then to SC.

Finance Act, 2017 & Tribunals Reforms

Rationalisation of Tribunals

• Reduced number of tribunals from 26 to 19.
• Merged similar-function tribunals.

Finance Act, 2017

• Empowered the Central Government to make rules for:
  • Qualification
  • Appointment
  • Terms of service
• Criticised for violating separation of powers.

SC Ruling (2021): Madras Bar Association v. Union of India

• Struck down provisions giving the executive overriding powers in appointments.
• Directed independent selection committee for appointments.

Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021

• Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021
• Aimed at streamlining and rationalising tribunal functioning.
• Dissolved 8 tribunals including:
  • Intellectual Property Appellate Tribunal
  • Airport Appellate Tribunal
• Transferred their functions to existing judicial bodies.
• Criticism:
  • Weakens quasi-judicial mechanism.
  • Overburdens existing courts.
  • Violates judicial independence.

Important Tribunals in India

Key Takeaways

• Tribunals = Quasi-judicial bodies for dispute resolution in specific matters (e.g., tax, service).
• Based on Article 323-A (Administrative Tribunals) and 323-B (other matters).
• Part of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).
• Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 rationalized tribunal structure.
• No uniform hierarchy – decisions sometimes challenged in High Courts or SC.

Quick Revision Table