NCERT Summary: Administrative Tribunals | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE PDF Download

The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act in 1976 introduced Article 323A according to which the Central and State Administrative Tribunals were set up. These Central and State Tribunals are set up to adjudicate cases related to recruitment, promotion, transfer and conditions of service of persons appointed to the Public services of the Union and the State Governments. The Parliament enacted the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) with branches in specified cities. Several cities also have the State Administrative Tribunals.

• The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the tribunal has the same status as that of the High Court Judges. The Chairman and Vice Chairman’s retirement age is 65 years. The other members’ retirement age is 62 years. The service matters related to employees of the Public Sector Undertaking (PSU)s are brought under the Central Administrative Tribunal or State Administrative Tribunals by a notification.
  (1) There are certain categories of employees who are not included in the purview of the Administrative Tribunals (ATs). They are mentioned below:
  (2) The employees of the Supreme Court and the High Courts do not come under the purview of the Administrative Tribunals.
  (3) Armed Forces personnel
  (4) The employees of the Secretariat of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha are also exempted from the purview of the Administrative Tribunals.
  (5) According to the 42nd Amendment Act, only the Supreme Court can entertain cases relating to service matters.
  (6) The Chairman and other members of the CAT and SAT are appointed by the President of India after consulting the Chief Justice of India. The Chairman must be a Judge of the High Court or one who served for at least two years as the High Court Judge or the Vice Chairman of Tribunal.
  (7) The Tribunals are set up to relieve the Courts of overload load and expedite the process of justice both in the Central and in the State level.
• The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act in 1976 introduced Article 323A according to which the Central and State Administrative Tribunals were set up. These Central and State Tribunals are set up to adjudicate cases related to recruitment, promotion, transfer and conditions of service of persons appointed to the Public services of the Union and the State Governments. The Parliament enacted the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) with branches in specified cities. Several cities also have the State Administrative Tribunals.
  (1) The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the tribunal has the same status as that of the High Court Judges. The Chair man and Vice - Chairman’s retirement age is 65 years. The other members’ retirement age is 62 years.
  (2) The service matters related to employees of the Public Sector Undertaking (PSU)s are brought under the Central Administrative Tribunal or State Administrative Tribunals by a notification.
  (3) There are certain categories of employees who are not included in the purview of the Administrative Tribunals (ATs). They are mentioned below:
  • The employees of the Supreme Court and the High Courts do not come under the purview of the Administrative Tribunals.
  • Armed Forces personnel and
  • The employees of the Secretariat of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha are also exempted from the purview of the Administrative Tribunals.
  (4) According to the 42nd Amendment Act, only the Supreme Court can entertain cases relating to service matters.
  (5) The Chairman and other members of the CAT and SAT are appointed by the President of India after consulting the Chief Justice of India. The Chairman must be a Judge of the High Court or one who served for atleast two years as the High Court Judge or the Vice Chairman of Tribunal.
  (6) The Tribunals are set up to relieve the Courts of overload and expedite the process of justice both in the Central and in the State level.

(i) ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS IN INDIA

• Administrative reform is a continuing necessity in a society, more so when the society confronts a quantum jump in its basic framework of governance including, of course, its goals. Thus viewed India started its career of an independent nation- state with a profound contradiction. The polity which was adopted was new, entirely of its own making and choice.
• But the instrument to implement its new tasks was inherited from the Raj and was thus continued from the past.
  (1) Administrative reform is a consciously planned activity of manipulation of the public administration of the country with a view to making it fulfil its pre-set objectives. This view makes it obligatory to regularly evaluate the implementation of the planned change with a view to finding out whether the changes realize the preset goals. In other words, evaluation must be viewed as a part of the process of administrative reform.
  (2) However the term is gaining growing acceptance over the years. ‘Administrative reform’ has emerged as a standard expression in public administration, and is there fore preferred here. A view prevailed in the early years after Independence that consequent on fundamental changes in the polity and environment public administration will stir itself and imbibe appropriate orientations and set out to acquire new skills. Mean while, another development brought a new alliance into existence. One of the earliest decisions of Independent India was in regard to socioeconomic planning as the mode of the country’s development.
  (3) India adopted command type planning based as it was on an expanding net work of control mechanisms. The colonially trained bureaucrat did not find himself out of place in the new regime. During the colonial period he was on top of the people; even under planning, his rule and domination remained unchanged but he was now ruling through license, quota and permits.

(ii) Evolution of the Indian Administrative System

(1) The public administrative system in India has a long history. Kingdoms existed in India several hundred years B.C.
(2) In the earlier era the civil servants performed the role of servants of the king. (Kautilya’s Arthshastra describes the civil service of those days and lays down various norms 300 B.C. to 1000 A.D)
(3) During the medieval period they became State servants. The land revenuesy stem was established during the Mughal period.
(4) The East Indian Company has a civil service to carry out their commercial functions.
(5) During the British rule they started as servants to the Crown, but gradually they started becoming ‘Public Servants’. The British government set up the Indian civil service, primarily with the objective of strengthening the British administration in the UK. In this period the role of the civil services was to further the British interest, and the role was totally regulatory. Later on they assumed development roles also.
(6) After independence, the public services as we see today came into being.

(iii) Existing Administrative System in India

(1) The civil service system in post independent India was reorganised.
(2) There are three tiers of administration Union Government, State Governments and the Local governments.
(3) At the central level, the civil services include the All­ India services, namely the Indian Administrative Service, the Indian Forest Service, and the Indian Police Service.
(4) There are various central services like the Indian Income Tax Service, Indian Railway Services etc.
(5) The State Governments have their own set of services.

(iv) Major Developments Impacting Administration

(1) Globalisation.
(2) Increasing disparities.
(3) Transformation of the world into a global village.
(4) Deregulation and privatization trends.
(5) Increasing awareness about human rights.
(6) State formerly interventionist, producer, regulator and seller now called upon to be a facilitator, promoter, and partner.
(7) Emergence of powerful technological solutions-computers and IT.
(8) Increasing expectations from the Governments to ‘perform’.

(v) After Independence

• Several Commissions and Committees have gone into the subject, and suggested various measures. Major reforms have been brought about based on the recommendations of these. Some of the important studies/ reports are as follows:
  (1) Report on Reorganisation of the Machinery of Government (1949) by Mr. Goplaswami Ayyangar : It recommended that the Central Ministries be bunched into Bureaus.
  (2) The Gorwala Committee appointed by the Planning Commission. It gave a general report on Public Administartion
  (3) Paul H. Apple by submitted two reports on Indian Administration. The O & M organisation and the Indian In stitute of Public Administration were set up as a result of the recdommendations.
  (4) The Committee on Prevention of Corruption was set up under chairmanship of Mr. K Santhanam (MP). The Central Vigilance Commission was set up according to the committees recommendations.
• Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances is the nodal agency of the Government for Administrative Reforms as well as redressal of public grievances relating to the States in general and grievances pertaining to Central Government agencies in particular.
• The Department disseminates information on important activities of the Government relating to administrative reforms best practices and public grievance redressal through publications and documentation. The Depart mental so under takes activities in the field of international exchange and cooperation to promote public service reforms.
  (1) The mission of the Department is to act as a facilitator, in consultation with Central Ministries / Departments, States / UT Administrations, Organisations and Civil Society Representatives, to improve Government functioning through process re- engineering, systemic changes.
  (2) Organisation and Methods, efficient Grievance handling, promoting modernisation, Citizens Charters, award schemes, e-governance and best practices in government.
  (3) A Commission on Review of Administrative Laws was set up by the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances on 8 May 1998 with a view to identify proposals for amendment of the existing laws, regulations and procedures having inter - sectoral impact and also for repeal of all dysfunctional laws.
  (4) The various Ministries/Departments have decided to retain 822 Acts (which include 700 Appropriation Acts and 27 Reorganisation Acts). The remaining Acts are at various stages of processing.

(i) First Administrative Reforms Commission

The First Administrative Reforms Commission set up in January, 1966 was asked, in particular, to consider all aspects relating to the following subjects:
(1) The machinery of the Government of India and its procedures of work;
(2) The machinery for planning at all levels;
(3) Centre-State relationship;
(4) Financial administration;
(5) Personnel administration;
(6) Economic administration;
(7) Administration at the state level;
(8) District administration;
(9) Agricultural administration;
(10) Problems of redress of citizens grievances

(ii) Second Administrative Reforms Commission

(1) The Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) was setup in 2005 under the Chairmanship of Shri Veerappa Moily to prepare a detailed blueprint for revamping the public administrative system. The Commission set up to suggest measures to achieve a proactive, responsive, accountable, sustainable and efficient administration for the country at all levels of the government has finished its term on April 30, 2009.
(2) Governance is the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It consists of the mechanisms, processes and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences.
(3) Without good governance, no amount of developmental schemes can bring in improvements in the quality of life of the citizens. On the contrary., if the power of the state is abused, or exercised in weak or improper ways, those with the least pow er in the society - the poor- are most likely to suffer. In that sense, poor governance generates and reinforces poverty and subverts efforts to reduce it. Strengthening governance is an essential precondition to improving the lives of the poor.
(4) The Tenth Plan document identified good governance as the single most important factor in ensuring that the Plan objectives are achieved. Among other things, decentralization of power and citizens’ empowerment, effective people’s participation through state and non-state mechanisms, greater synergy and consolidation among various agencies and programmes of government, civil service reforms, transparency, rationalization of government schemes and mode of financial assistance to states, improved access to formal justice system to enforce rights, reforms and strengthening of land administration and harnessing the power of technology for governance have been identified as the key priorities.

(1) Shri Veerappa Moily - Chairperson
(2) Shri V. Ramachandran - Member
(3) Dr. A.P. Mukherjee - Member
(4) Dr. A.H. Kalro - Member
(5) Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan - Member
(6) Smt. Vineeta Rai - Member-Secretary

• The path-breaking Right to Information Act has come into effect recently. This new law applies to union and state agencies, local governments and even societies and trusts which receive public funds. This far-reaching law also provides for independent information commissioners, proactive disclosures and reporting mechanisms and has the potential to impact our governance process in a profound and positive way by empowering citizens.
• In all, the Commission has presented the following 15 Reports to the Governsment:
  (1) Right to Information-Master Key to Good Governance (09.06.2006)
  (2) Unlocking Human Capital - Entitlements and Governance-a Case Study (31.07.2006)
  (3) Crisis Management-From Despair to Hope (31.10.2006)
  (4) Ethics in Governance (12.02.2007)
  (5) Public Order-Justice for each peace for all. (25.06.2007)
  (6) Local Governance (27.11.2007)
  (7) Capacity Building for Conflict Resolution - Friction to Fusion (17.3.2008)
  (8) Combating Terrorism (17.9.2008)
  (9) Social Capital - A Shared Destiny (8.10.2008)
  (10) Refurbishing of Personnel Administration - Scaling New Heights (27.11.2008)
  (11) Promoting e-Governance - The Smart Way Forward (20.01.2009)
  (12) Citizen Centric Administration - The Heart of Governance (30.3.2009)
  (13) Organisational Structure of Government of India (19.5.2009)
  (14) Strengthening Financial Management Systems (26.5.2009)
  (15) State & District Administration (29.5.2009)

• The Fifth Report from the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Affairs of the East India Company 1812 
• The Public Service Commission 1886-87 
• The Royal Commission upon Decentralization 1907-09 
• The Govt. of India Clerks’ Salaries Committee 1908 
• The Royal Commission on the Public Service in India 1914-17 
• The Report on Indian Constitutional Reforms 1918-19 
• Report of the Government of India Secretariat Procedure Committee 1919 
• The Indian Retrenchment Committee 1922-23 
• The Royal Commission on The Superior Civil Service in India 1924 
• The Reforms Enquiry Committee 1924 
• The Committee Appointed by the All-Parties Conference to Determine the Principles of The Constitution for India 1928 
• The Indian Central Committee 1929 
• The Indian Statutory Commission 7930 
• The Sub-Committee on Services (Indian Round Table Conference) 1932 
• The Government of India Secretariat Committee 1937 
• The Committee of Organisation and Procedure 1937 
• The Committee on The Selectors and Training of Candidates for the India Civil Service 1944 
• Report on the Re-organisation of Central Government 1945-46 
• The Advisory Planning Board 1947 
• The Secretariat Re-organisation Committee 1947 
• The Central Pay Commission 1947 
• The National Committee 1948 
• The Economic Committee 1948 
• Re-organisation of The Machinery of Government 1949 
• Report on Public Administration 1951 
• Report on Efficient Conduct of State Enterprises 1951 
• Public Administration in India -Report of Survey 1953 
• The Railway Corruption Enquiry Committee 1955 
• The States Re-organisation Commission 1955
• Examination of India’s Administrative System with special reference to Administration of Governments’ Industrial and Commercial Enterprises 1956 
• The Public Service (Qualification to Recruitment) Committee 1956 
• The Commission of Enquiry on Emoluments and Conditions of Service of Central Government Employees 1957-59 
• The Congress Parliamentary Party Sub-Committee on State Undertakings 1959 
• Report on Indian and State Administrative Service and Problems of District Administration 1962 
• The Committee on Prevention of Corruption 1962 
• The Committee on The Indian Foreign Service 1966 
• Interim Report of The Administrative Reforms Committee on Problems of Redress of Citizens’ Grievances 1966 
• Report of The Study Team on Relations Between The Press and Administration 1966 
• Administrative Reforms Commission report on Public Sector Undertakings 1967 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on the Machinery of The Govt. of India and its Procedure at work 1967 
• Interim Report on Machinery for Planning 1967 
• Report of The Study Team on Financial Admn. 1967 
• Administrative Reforms Commission, Study Team on Promotion Policies, Conduct Rules, Discipline and Morale 1967 
• Report of the study team on Recruitment, Selection UPSC/State PSCs and Training 1967
• Report of Working Group on Performance Budgeting 1967 
• Administrative Reforms Commission report on life Insurance Administration 1968 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Railways 1968 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Finance Account & Audit 1968 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Economic 1968 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Machinery for Planning 1968 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on State Administration 1969 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Reserve Bank of India 1969 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Centre- State Relationship 1969 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Delegation of Financial and Administrative Powers 1969 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Central Direct Taxes Administration 1969 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Small Scale Sector 1969
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Administration of Union Territories and NEFA 1969 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Personnel Administration 1969 
• The Administrative Reforms Commission 1969 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Post and Telegraph 1970 
• Administrative Reforms Commission Report on Treasuries 1970 
• The Third Central Pay Commission 1973 
• The Committee on Recruitment Policy and Selection Methods 1976 
• Economic Administrative Reforms Commission 1983 
• The Committee on Centre State Relations 1988 
• The Committee to Review the Scheme of the Civil Services Examination (The Committee on The Civil Services Examination) 1989 
• The National Development Council of Austerity 1992 
• The Fifth Central Pay Commission 1997 
• Expenditure Reforms Commission 2000 
• Report of the Civil Service Examination Review Committee 2001 
• Report of the Committee to Review in—Service Training of the IAS Officers 2003 
• Surendra Nath’s Committee Report 2003 
• Committee on Civil Service Reforms 2004

(i) Reasons for Reforms
(1) There have been umpteen number of demands to reform the police system and laws as these are unable to deal with the contemporary challenges.
(2) Pro-reformists have been arguing that the 1856 Indian Police Act was framed in an age in which the crimes as witnessed these days were far. from imagination.
(3) The Supreme Court asked the government to bring about the police reforms soon.

(ii) Objectives of the reforms
(1) The most significant aspect of the proposed reforms is intended to be the mechanism to end external influence on the law enforcing body and improve the standards of police personnel.
(2) The aim is to make police efficient, effective, people friendly and accountable by ending corruption and breaking the cops’ nexus with antisocial elements.

(iii) Soli Sorabjee Committee Recommendations
(1) A Government-appointed Committee Headed By renowned legal luminary Soft Sorabjee recently submitted its report to the government making a slew of recommendations.
(2) These include fixing a two-year tenure for director generals of police, creating separate wings of law and order and investigation and better working and living conditions for cops.
(3) The report significantly outlines the ways in which police can deal with the contemporary challenges like terrorism and insurgency.

(iv) National Security Commission
(1) There is a proposal to set up lie national security commission - for the selection and placement of chiefs of Central police organizations - to ensure that the DGPs of paramilitary forces like the BSF, CRPF, ITBP, SSB and CISF tire selected in a fair manner and have a fixed tenure of at least two years.
(2) The national security commission could he headed by the Union Home Minister and comprise heads of Central police organisations and security experts as members.
(3) In states, the State Sectuity Commission would act as a watch dog and be headed by the Chief Minister or Home Minister with a DGP as ex­ officio secretary. The members of the panel would he chosen in a manner that would ensure Its complete independence.

(v) State Police Complaint Authority
(1) State police complaint authority, to be headed by a retired Supreme Court or High Court judge. would look after the complaints of misconduct against officers of the rank of SP and above while the district complaint authority would look into complaints against officers of the rank of DSP and below.
(2) It will be headed by a retired District Judge. The head and other members of these authorities would he appointed by the state government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the high court and members would be drawn from a panel prepared by the Stale Human Rights Commission, Lokavukra and the State Public Service Commission.

(vi) Reforms in Criminal Justice System
Madhava Menon Panel Report
(1) A committee appointed by the Union Home Ministry on reforming the criminal justice system has suggested major changes. including multiple criminal codes based on the gravity of offence and setting up a separate national authority to deal with crimes impacting the county’s security.
(2) The committee headed by Madhava Merton was appointed in May 2006.
(3) The report was submitted on 2 August 2007 to Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil. Observations:
(4) The panel took in to account the widespread dissatisfaction with way crimes were in vestigated and criminals prosecuted. It noted that money and influence played significant role resulting in double standards. The rich often get away lightly and the poor are put to suffering. The registration of complaint for the poor is an ordeal.

(vii) Recommendations
(1) One of the important recommendations is the creation of multiple criminal codes.
(2) The committee wanted crimes to be reorganised into four distinct codes based on the gravity of injury and the response required to deal with it.
(3) Under the first two categories- social welfare offences code (SWOC) and correctional offences code (COC) offences- recourse to arrest should be an exception (except where violence is involved) and the elaborate prosecution system avoided.
(4) The third set of offences, to be included in the penal code (PC), is graver crimes punishable with imprisonment of more than three years and up to death.
(5) These cases require quick processing, ensuring the protection of human rights and greater accountability from law enforcement agencies. Finally, an economic offences code (EOC) should deal with crimes threatening the economic health and security of the country.
(5) Taking note of disparity in sentences for the same crime, the panel wanted a sentencing board of three judges including the trial judge for crimes punish able with death or life imprisonment.
(6) Probation should be invoked more often, especially for short-term jail terms and parole regulated more strictly.
(7) Setting up of a separate national authority to deal with crimes impacting country’s security.
(8) Creation of an ombudsman for criminal justice.
(9) Full application of the Right to Information Act to all aspects of criminal justice.
(10) Corruption cases threatening national security and institutional foundation should be undertaken by a separate body with a status comparable to that of the Election Commission.
(11) E- FIRS should be introduced.
(12) Custodial violence should be tackled more severely.
(13) The audio/video statements to the police should he made admissible in evidence, provided the accused has consulted his lawyers.
(14) There should be a code of ethics for lawyers.
(15) Concept of legal aid should he enlarged to provide for psychiatric and rehabilitative services the victim besides incorporating a system of compensation.
(16) There should be two separate laws for child in conflict with law and two child in need of care and protection.

(viii) Expenditure Reforms Commission, 2001
(1) Government of India set up the Expenditure Reforms Commission, under the chairmanship of K.P. Geethakrishnan, a retired bureaucrat who had earlier functioned as the finance secretary in the Government of India. Appointed in February 2000, it was given one year’s time to complete its economy exercise suggesting ‘a road map for reducing the functions, activities and administrative structure of the Government’.
(2) The Expenditure Reforms Commission functioned as a staff reduction committee in view of the Government’s worry that the non developmental expenditure of the Government was showing a very high rate of growth calling for its immediate down sizing. The Commission submitted ten reports, the final one in September 2001 when it was wound up.