This article is written by Neha Gururani , a student of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi. In this article, she has discussed the dynamic concept of administrative tribunals in India, its characteristics, advantages and defects with reference to the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
In Administrative law, the term ‘tribunal’ is used in a significant sense and refers to only the adjudicatory bodies which lie outside the sphere of the ordinary judicial system. Technically in India, the judicial powers are vested in the Courts which aims to safeguard the rights of the individuals and promotes justice. Therefore, to institute an effective system of the judiciary with fewer complexities, the judicial powers are delegated to the administrative authorities, thus, giving rise to administrative tribunals or administrative adjudicatory bodies which holds quasi-judicial features.
To know more about the Administrative Tribunals in brief, please refer to the video below:
The concept of tribunalisation came into existence in India with the establishment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal before the independence of the country. After independence, a need was being felt for resolving administrative disputes with flexibility and speed. The core objective of tribunalisation was to provide specialised and speedy justice to the people.
After the drafting of the Indian Constitution, several rights for the welfare of the individuals were guaranteed by the Constitution. People have the right to speedy trials and of specialised quality which cannot be delivered by the prevailing judicial system due to the overburden of cases and appeals, technicalities in procedure etc.
Hence, the need for the inception of the administrative tribunals couldn’t be ignored.
The 42nd Amendment to the Constitution introduced Part XIV-A which included Article 323A and 323B providing for constitution of tribunals dealing with administrative matters and other issues. According to these provisions of the Constitution, tribunals are to be organized and established in such a manner that they do not violate the integrity of the judicial system given in the Constitution which forms the basic structure of the Constitution.
The introduction of Article 323A and 323B was done with the primary objective of excluding the jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226 and 227, except the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 136 and for originating an efficacious alternative institutional mechanism or authority for specific judicial cases.
The purpose of establishing tribunals to the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the High Courts was done to reduce the pendency and lower the burden of cases. Therefore, tribunals are organised as a part of civil and criminal court system under the supremacy of the Supreme Court of India.
From a functional point of view, an administrative tribunal is neither an exclusively judicial body nor an absolute administrative body but is somewhere between the two. That is why an administrative tribunal is also called ‘quasi-judicial’ body.
The following are the few attributes of the administrative tribunals which make them quite disparate from the ordinary courts:
Article 323A provides the establishment of administrative tribunals by law made by Parliament for the adjudication of disputes and complaints related to the recruitment and conditions of service of Government servants under the Central Government and the State Government. It includes the employees of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India or of a corporation owned or controlled by the Government.
The establishment of such tribunals must be at the centre and state level separately for each state or for two or more states. The law must incorporate the provisions for the jurisdiction, power and authority to be exercised by tribunals; the procedure to be followed by tribunals; the exclusion of the jurisdiction of all other courts except the Supreme Court of India.
Article 323B empowers the Parliament and the State Legislature to establish tribunals for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the matters specified under clause (2) of Article 323B. Some of the matters given under clause (2) are a levy, assessment, collection and enforcement of any tax; foreign exchange and export; industrial and labour disputes; production, procurement, supply and distribution of foodstuffs; rent and it’s regulation and control and tenancy issues etc. Such a law must define the jurisdiction, powers of such tribunals and lays down the procedure to be followed.
In the landmark case of L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India[1] , the court reached various conclusions as to jurisdictional powers of the tribunal constituted under Articles 323A and 323B. The Supreme Court struck down clause 2(d) of Article 323A and clause 3(d) of Article 323B on the ground that they excluded the jurisdiction of the High Courts and the Supreme Court under Article 226/227 and 32 respectively.
The SC ruled that the tribunals created under Article 323A and 323B would continue to be the courts of the first instance in their respective areas for which they are constituted. The litigants are not allowed to approach the High Courts directly by overlooking the jurisdiction of the concerned tribunal.
No appeal for the decision of the tribunal would lie directly before the Supreme Court under Article 136 but instead, the aggrieved party would be entitled to move the High Court under Article 226 and 227 and after the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court, the party may approach the Apex Court under Article 136.
Administrative Tribunal
A Court of law is a part of the traditional judicial system.
The administrative tribunal is an agency created by a statue endowed with judicial powers.
A Court of law is vested with general jurisdiction over all the matters.
It deals with service matters and is vested with limited jurisdiction to decide a particular issue.
It is strictly bound by all the rules of evidence and by the procedure of the Code of Civil Procedure.
It is not bound by the rules of the Evidence Act and the CPC unless the statute which creates the tribunal imposes such an obligation.
It is presided over by an officer expert in the law.
It is not mandatory in every case that the members need to be trained and experts in law.
The decision of the court is objective in nature primarily based on the evidence and materials produced before the court.
The decision is subjective i.e. at times it may decide the matters taking into account the policy and expediency.
It is bound by precedents, the principle of res judicata and the principle of natural justice.
It is not obligatory to follow precedents and principle of res judicata but the principle of natural justice must be followed.
It can decide the validity of legislation.
It cannot decide the validity of legislation.
The courts do not follow investigatory or inquisition functions rather it decides the case on the basis of evidence.
Many tribunals perform investigatory functions as well along with its quasi-judicial functions.
In pursuance of the provisions in Article 323A, Parliament passed the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, providing for all the matters falling within the clause(1) of Article 323-A .
According to this Act, there must be a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) at the centre and a State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) at the state level for every state.
The tribunal is competent to declare the constitutionality of the relevant laws and statutes. The Act extends to, in so far as it is related to the Central Administrative Tribunal, to the whole of India and in relation to the Administrative tribunals for states, it is applicable to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir ( Section 1 ).
The main purpose of the introduction of this act was :
According to Section 2 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the act applies to all Central Government employees except –
Section 4 of this Act describes the composition of the tribunals and bench. Each tribunal shall consist of a Chairman, Vice Chairman, Judicial and Administrative members. Every bench must include at least one judicial and one administrative member. The benches of the Central Tribunal shall ordinarily sit at New Delhi, Allahabad, Calcutta, Madras, Bombay and such other place as the Central Government specifies. The Chairman may transfer the Vice Chairman or other members from one bench to another bench.
Section 6 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, lays the provisions specifying the qualifications and appointment of the members of tribunals.
Chairman: To be appointed as a chairman, a person must have the following qualifications-
Vice-Chairman: A person is qualified for the post of Vice-Chairman if he-
Judicial Member: A person to be appointed as a judicial member must-
Administrative Member: A person to be appointed as an Administrative member must-
The Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other members shall be appointed by the President. The Judicial Members shall be appointed by the President with the consultation of the Chief Justice of India. The Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other members of the State Tribunal shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Governor of the concerned state.
According to Section 8 of the Act, the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other members of the tribunal shall hold the office for a term of 5 years or until he attains-
Section 9 of the Act prescribes the procedure of resignation by any member and removal of any member.
The Chairman, Vice-Chairman or other members may resign from his post by writing to the President.
They shall be removed from their office only by an order made by the President on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after an enquiry made by a judge of the Supreme Court. They shall have the right to be informed of the charges against them and shall be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Central Government may make rules to regulate the procedure for the investigation of the charges against them.
Section 14 states that the Central Tribunal from the day of the appointment shall exercise all the jurisdiction, powers and authority in relation to the following matters which were within the jurisdiction of other courts (except the Supreme Court) before the enactment of this Act:
Section 22 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 lays down the powers and procedure of tribunals discussed below-
Facts: The constitutional validity of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, was predominantly challenged on the ground that this Act excludes the jurisdiction of High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 with regard to service matters and hence, destroyed the concept of judicial review which was an essential feature of the Indian Constitution.
Judgment: A five-Judge Bench of the Court upheld the validity of the Act except Section 6(1)(c). The court held that although this Act has excluded the jurisdiction of judicial review exercised by the High Courts in the service matters it has not entirely excluded the concept of judicial review. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32 and 136 has not been excluded by this Act and kept unscathed.
Thus, there still exists an authority where matters of injustice can be entertained by judicial review. The judicial review which is the part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution can be taken away from a particular area only if an alternative effectual institutional mechanism or authority is provided.
However, Section 6 (1)(c) of the Act was held to be unconstitutional as it gave unrestricted power to the Government to appoint the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other members of the tribunals. These appointments must be made by the Government in a meaningful and effective manner only after consulting the Chief Justice of India.
The court recommended that the term of 5 years prescribed under the Act for Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other members of the tribunal is not rational because it would act as dissuasion for the good and generous people to accept the job in the tribunal and should, therefore, be reasonably extended.
The directions given by the Supreme Court came into effect through the Administrative Tribunals (Amendment) Act, 1987.
Facts: The constitutionality of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on the following grounds-
Judgment: the court upheld the constitutionality of NCLT and NCLAT in exercising the powers and jurisdiction of the High Court subject to necessary changes to be made in the Companies Act, 1956 as amended in 2002, through suitable amendments
The court acknowledged and upheld the constitutional power of the Parliament to constitute tribunals for adjudication of disputes. The legislative competence of Parliament to provide for the creation of courts and tribunals can be traced to Article 245 , 246 and 247 of the Constitution read with various entries in the Union List and the Concurrent List which is in no way affected or controlled by Article 323A or 323B of the Constitution.
The court further added that it cannot be assumed that constitution of tribunals and transferring judicial powers per se infringe the rule of law, separation of powers and independence of the judiciary because the Constitution enables both courts and tribunals to exercise judicial powers.
What matters the most is whether the constituted tribunals respect and maintain the principles of separation of powers, rule of law and independence of the judiciary. The constitution of NCLT and NCLAT must be subject to judicial review so that the court in the exercise of judicial review look into the matter to check if these principles are compromised by such tribunalisation and may interfere in between to preserve the same.
The concept of administrative tribunals was introduced because it has certain advantages over ordinary courts. Few of them are mentioned below-
Although, administrative tribunals play a very crucial role in the welfare of modern society, yet it has some defects in it. Some of the criticisms of the administrative tribunal are discussed below-
It can be concluded that in the present scenario, the administration has become an important part of the government as well as the citizen’s life. Due to this increasing role, it is important to establish a competent authority for the redressal of people’s grievances and adjudication of the disputes. Therefore, the concept of administrative tribunals was emerged and is dynamically flourishing in India holding certain flaws and strengths.
Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.
LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:
Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.
