Administrative Tribunals | Public Administration Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Introduction

• The recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee was to establish Administrative Tribunals as part of the Constitutional adjudicative system.
• Article 323A of the Constitution allows for the establishment of Administrative Tribunals to handle complaints regarding recruitment, conditions of service in public services, and related matters.
• The Administrative Tribunals Act of 1985 was enacted by Parliament to authorize the establishment of the Central Administrative Tribunal and state administrative tribunals.

Establishment and Functions

• An administrative tribunal is distinct from a court and is established by the executive branch in accordance with statutory provisions.
• It is required to act in a judicial manner and carry out quasi-judicial functions.
• The tribunal's proceedings are considered judicial, and it possesses certain powers of a Civil Court in procedural matters.
• Decisions made by the tribunal are based on the principles of natural justice.

Central Administrative Tribunal

• The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) is established under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, along with State Administrative Tribunals.
• The CAT has original jurisdiction over recruitment and conditions of service in public services.
• Its members are drawn from both the judicial and administrative backgrounds to provide expertise in legal and administrative matters.

Advantages

• Flexibility:
  • Unlike courts, administrative tribunals follow the principles of natural justice instead of rigid procedures and evidence requirements.
• Cost-effectiveness:
  • Administrative justice ensures affordable and expeditious resolution.
  • The tribunal's procedures are straightforward and easily understood by non-legal individuals.
• Relief to Courts:
  • Administrative tribunals alleviate the burden on regular courts, which are already overwhelmed with numerous cases.
• Provision of Adequate Justice:
  • In the modern welfare society, administrative tribunals are a suitable means of administrative action and a highly effective way to provide fair justice to individuals.
  • Lawyers, who focus more on legal aspects, may struggle to fully assess the needs of the modern society.

Disadvantages

• Negation of Rule of Law:
  • Administrative adjudication can undermine the principles of the Rule of Law.
• Limitations on Rule of Law:
  • Administrative tribunals, with their separate laws and procedures, often set by themselves, can impose significant limitations on the principles of the Rule of Law.
• Lack of Independence:
  • Many tribunals do not enjoy the same level of independence from the Executive as courts and judges.
• Lack of Uniformity:
  • Unlike civil and criminal courts, administrative tribunals lack a standardized code of procedure.
• Expertise and Procedures:
  • Administrators and technical experts without legal backgrounds or judicial training often staff administrative tribunals.
  • Summary procedures may be employed by tribunals to handle cases.

Concerns/Challenges

• Lack of Autonomy:
  • Administrative tribunals face issues of autonomy, particularly concerning appointment and funding.
• Appeal Process:
  • The Supreme Court ruling in the Chandra Kumar case stated that appeals from such tribunals lie before the court, which defeats the purpose of reducing the burden on superior courts.
• Potential Bias:
  • Since retired judges appointed by the government often chair tribunals, existing judges in courts may display favoritism toward the government in certain matters to secure appointments to these tribunals after retirement.
• Inadequate Infrastructure:
  • Insufficient infrastructure poses challenges to the smooth functioning and original envisioned purpose of tribunals.
• Staffing Requirements:
  • There is a lack of understanding regarding the staffing needs of tribunals.

Way Forward

• Reforming Traditional Structures and Methods:
  • To enhance justice delivery, it is important to reform the traditional structures and functioning of tribunals.
• Judicial Control:
  • To uphold the rule of law and preserve individual freedom, some form of judicial control over tribunals should be implemented.
• Increasing Judicial Capacity:
  • Increasing the number of judges, filling existing vacancies, and utilizing technology can enhance the efficiency of justice administration.
• Empowering Tribunals:
  • Tribunals themselves are better equipped to assess their administrative requirements, so granting them the power to create or approve positions would be beneficial provide power to tribunals to create or sanction posts would ensure that they have the necessary staffing resources to function effectively.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while administrative tribunals offer certain advantages such as flexibility, cost-effectiveness, and relief to overloaded courts, there are also challenges that need to be addressed. By undertaking reforms focused on autonomy, judicial control, capacity-building, and infrastructure enhancement, the administrative tribunal system can be strengthened to ensure better justice delivery and uphold the principles of the rule of law.