Dispute Resolution Mechanism - Free MCQ Practice Test with solutions, UPSC

Statement-I is correct in stating that an Administrative Tribunal is not a court. These tribunals are specialized bodies set up to deal with specific types of disputes outside the traditional court system. Statement-II correctly highlights the jurisdiction of Civil Courts to try civil suits, which is a fundamental aspect of the judicial system. The second statement explains the nature of the judicial power of Civil Courts in contrast to Administrative Tribunals. Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer as both statements are accurate, with Statement-II providing additional context to Statement-I.

1. Tribunal : A judicial body bound by statutory rules - Incorrect. Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies and are not bound by statutory rules but by the principles of natural justice.

2. Fast Track Courts : Established to reduce pending cases and ensure speedy trials - Correct. Fast Track Courts were established to clear the backlog of pending cases and to ensure speedy trials, particularly for sessions and lower judicial cases.

3. Gram Nyayalaya : Provides speedy, substantial, and inexpensive justice at the grassroots level - Correct. Gram Nyayalayas were established under the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008, to provide speedy, substantial, and inexpensive justice at the grassroots level.

4. Tribunal : Can decide the vires of legislation - Incorrect. Tribunals cannot decide the vires of legislation. Their role is more focused on the adjudication of specific types of disputes within their jurisdiction.

Hence, only two pairs are correctly matched.

1. Lack of enforcement: Incorrect. Only 9 states have notified Gram Nyayalayas, and only 4 of these have functional courts.

2. Financial constraints: Incorrect. Gram Nyayalayas are not set up at every Gram Panchayat due to financial constraints. They have jurisdiction over more than one panchayat.

3. Ill-defined jurisdiction: Correct. There is ambiguity and confusion regarding the specific jurisdiction of Gram Nyayalayas due to the existence of alternative forums such as labour courts, family courts, etc.

4. Negligible dispensation of cases: Incorrect. The number of cases disposed of by Gram Nyayalayas is negligible and does not make a substantial difference in the overall pendency in subordinate courts.

Only the third pair is correctly matched. Therefore, the correct answer is Option B: Only two pairs.

1. Correct: The Fast Track Courts (FTCs) were indeed established with the aim to clear the long-pending Sessions and other lower judicial cases. This was a significant step to reduce the burden on the judiciary and expedite the judicial process.

2. Correct: The central government initially continued its support for the functional FTCs beyond 2005 until 2011, showing a commitment to maintaining these courts to help clear the backlog of cases.

3. Incorrect: There is no constitutional requirement that mandates the establishment of Fast Track Courts in every district. The establishment and continuation of FTCs have been based on government orders and policy decisions rather than a constitutional mandate.

Therefore, the correct answer is Option B

1. Correct: The statement that the Gram Nyayalayas Act mandated the establishment of 5,000 village courts, but only 172 have been set up, with 152 being functional, is accurate. This reflects the lack of enforcement of the Act.

2. Incorrect: The statement that establishing courts at each of the 260,000 gram panchayats is financially feasible for state governments is incorrect. The text clearly indicates that doing so would involve huge expenditure, which is why it was decided that gram nyayalayas would have jurisdiction over more than one panchayat.

3. Correct: The statement that Gram Nyayalayas face issues with infrastructure, including lack of buildings, office spaces, and related equipment, is accurate as per the provided content.

Hence, the correct statements are 1 and 3. Therefore, the correct answer is Option B.

Statement 1 is correct: The National Tribunals Commission (NTC) is indeed proposed to be established by a statute of Parliament and will operate through a Board that comprises sitting judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, executive members nominated by the central government, and a senior advocate. This structure ensures a mix of judicial and executive oversight.

Statement 2 is incorrect: The NTC does not have the authority to directly appoint members to all tribunals without any selection committee. Instead, the appointment process involves a selection committee, open advertisements, or an All-India Entrance Examination for Tribunals (AIEET). This ensures a transparent and merit-based selection process.

Statement 3 is correct: The tenure of tribunal members is proposed to be between 5-7 years or until the age of 62-65 years, whichever is earlier. This is intended to ensure that tribunal members have a significant period to contribute while also maintaining a dynamic and impartial body.

Thus, the correct answer is Option C.

1. 42nd Amendment: Introduced Part XIV-A to the Constitution - Correct. The 42nd Amendment added Articles 323A and 323B, providing for the constitution of tribunals.

2. Finance Act, 2017: Addressed the framework of tribunals in India - Correct. The Finance Act, 2017 made significant changes to the tribunal system in India.

3. 272nd Law Commission Report: Focused on the assessment of statutory frameworks of tribunals in India - Correct. The 272nd Report by the Law Commission of India dealt with the assessment of the statutory frameworks of tribunals in India.

4. 74th Parliamentary Standing Committee Report: Dealt with local self-governance in urban areas - Incorrect. The 74th Amendment to the Constitution, not the 74th Parliamentary Standing Committee Report, deals with local self-governance in urban areas. The correct report should be the 74th Parliamentary Standing Committee Report on "The Tribunals, Appellate Tribunals and Other Authorities (Conditions of Service) Bill, 2014."

Thus, pairs 1, 2, and 3 are correctly matched, while pair 4 is incorrectly matched.

The main objective behind establishing Fast Track Courts (FTCs) in India was to clear the considerable amount of pending cases, thereby reducing the burden on district and high courts. These courts were specifically set up to expedite the legal process and give proper attention to cases, particularly those related to sexual assault. By focusing on speedy trials and high case clearance rates, FTCs have been instrumental in addressing the backlog of cases and enhancing judicial efficiency.

The primary objective behind establishing administrative tribunals in India was to adjudicate on disputes or complaints that lie outside the sphere of the ordinary judicial system. These tribunals were set up to handle specific types of cases and provide a faster and more specialized form of justice. They were designed to ease the burden on traditional courts and ensure quicker resolution of certain types of legal disputes.

1. Tribunal's Appellate Jurisdiction: Appeals to High Court in absence of appellate tribunal - Correct. The Commission recommended that appeals against a tribunal’s order should lie before a High Court only where the law establishing such a tribunal does not establish an appellate tribunal.

2. Location of Tribunal Benches: Only in National Capital Region - Incorrect. Tribunals should have benches in different parts of the country to ensure access to justice by people across geographical areas, preferably where High Courts are situated.

3. National Tribunals Commission (NTC): Operates under a statute of Parliament - Correct. The NTC can be set up by a statute of Parliament and operate through a Board.

4. Qualifications for Tribunal Chairperson: Minimum 15 years of judicial experience - Incorrect. The qualifications for the chairperson should be uniform, but the requirement for technical members is a minimum of 15 years of domain expertise, not judicial experience.

Thus, only pairs 1 and 3 are correctly matched.