UPSC Exam  >  UPSC Notes  >  Indian Polity for UPSC CSE  >  Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity

Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE PDF Download

Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

It appears that the experience with the functioning of the tribunals constituted under Article 323-A and 323-B of the Constitution has been so exasperating that the Supreme Court was constrained to restore partly the jurisdiction of the high courts under Article 226 and 227 while down-grading the role of tribunals from ‘substitutional’ to ‘supplemental’ to the high courts. The judgment in the recent Chandra Kumar's case will be remembered not only for its unequivocal declaration that the power of judicial review vested in the Supreme Court and the high courts constitutes part of the basic structure of the Constitution which cannot be abridged, but also for the craftsmanship with which the original jurisdiction of the tribunals, the writh jurisdication of the high courts and the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 136 have been restructured by the judicial process.

Had the apex court stopped with the finding that Clause (2)(d) of Article 323-A and Clause (3)(d) of Article 323-B, which excluded the jurisdiction of the high courts and the Supreme Court are unconstitutional, it would have resulted in a state of utter counfusion and chaos. The court, therefore, had to find an innovative solution to a pressing problem. The method evolved by the court allows the tribunals to continue to function as courts of first instance but subject to the writ jurisdiction of the high courts and requires persons aggrieved by the decisions of the tribunals to first approach the high courts (under Article 226 and 227) and thereafter, if necessary, move the Supreme Court under Article 136 for special leave to appeal. The solution, undoubtedly, is a pragmatic one though it is more legislative in character than judicial.

These are days of compulsive judicial activism. Had the union executive and Parliament responded in time to the suggestion made by the court in R. K. Jain's case to have the functioning of the tribunals examined by an expert body like the Law Commission and come out with necessary changes in the law this decision could have been avoided.

The theory of basic structure was first propounded by a Bench of 13 judges in 1973 in the Kesavananda Bharati case. Since then several amendments to the Constitution have been struck down on the anvil of basic structure, the latest being the 42nd amendment, 1976, which, inter alia, inserted Clause (2)(d) of Article 323-A and Clause (3)(d) of Article 323-B to the extent they permitted exclusion of the jurisdiction of the high courts and the Supreme Court. The doctrine of basic structure is now deeply entrenched in India and is gaining support in other countries too. With increasing judicial activism, the age-old theory of separation of powers is becoming more and more flexible.

The writ jurisdiction affords ample opportunities for both legal talent and judicial creativity. Commenting on the Indian Constitution soon after its enactment, Sir lvor Jennings had predicted that the writ jurisdiction would turn out to be a lawyers' paradise.

Any aggrieved person could have direct access to superior courts for obtaining quick relief against the State for violation of any fundamental right. Within a few years this new jurisdiction became so popular that the high courts were flooded with petitions which they were unable to cope with. Consequently, arrears of cases started piling up in almost all the high courts notwithstanding the creation of additional posts of judges from time to time.

Several expert committees consisting of retired judges of the Superme Court and of high courts recommmended the creation of tribunals for dealing with certain classes of cases as an alternative to the high courts. The Supreme 'Court in some of its judgmets made the same suggestion. Acting on these suggestions, Parliament inserted Article 323-A and Article 323-B which provided for the establishment of administrative tribunals for resolving service disputes and other tribunals for a variety of matters relating to tax, foreign exchange, elections, land reforms, etc.

As the intention was to relieve the high courts of the extra burden by transferring part of the jurisdiction to the tribunals, these articles permitted exclusion of the jurisdiction of all courts except the Supreme Court in all matters dealt with by the tribunals.

Highlights

  • Judicial review is a basic feature of the Constitution.
  • Parliament has no uncontrolled freedom.
  • Tribunals to act like courts of first instance.
  • Provisions of the Tribunal Act which bypass High Courts declared unconstitutional.
  • Tribunals can decide constitutional validity of statutory provisions and rules.

 Basic features

The following are the basic features of the Constitution according to various judgments of the Supreme Court:

  • Secularism
  • Rule of Law 
  • Judicial Review

All cases which fell within the jurisdiction of the tribunals were transferred to them soon after the establishment of the tribunals. Although in Sampath Kumar's case (1985) a Bench of five judges had tacitly endoresed Article 323-A and 323-B, the functioning of the tribunals, manned  partly by judicial and partly by administrative members, was found to be unsatisfactory. The Malimath Committee, in its report (1989-90), pointed out that the tribunals, by and large, have not inspired confidence in the public mind, the foremost reason being lack of competence, objectivity and judicial approach. Tribunals were unable to dispose of cases speedily resulting in huge backlog of cases.

Following the suggestion in the R.K. Jain case, the law Commission issued a comprehensive questionnaire for eliciting public opinion, but could not proceed further after the correctness of post-Sampath Kumar cases was referred to a larger Bench in 1995 by another Bench. A Bench of seven judges has now resolved the problem without unsettling the decisions already given by the tribunals and without affecting the cases pending in the Suprence Court.

What is the net result of the latest decision? The tribunals have lost their status, but not jurisdiction. The high courts have not regained their jurisdiction fully in as much as they cannot entertain any writ petition in the first instance. Earlier, after losing in a tribunal, the aggrieved persons could immediately approach the Supreme Court for special leave to appeal. Now, it will not be possible to go to the Supreme Court directly from a decision of a tribunal, without first moving the high court. In this respect the Supreme Court has curtailed its own jurisdiction under Article 136. Persons who are subject to the jurisdiction of tribunals have gained another remedy by way of a writ petition before the high court concerned, but lost the opportunity of approaching the Supreme Court directly. What was earlier a two-tier litigation has now become a three - tier process . The strength of the judgment lay in the fact that it is unanimous.

But the apex court has used the case to settle once and for all the question whether judicial review is a  basic feature of the constitution. In short, no amendment passed by Parliament in the future can bar the courts from pronouncing judgment on its constitutional validity.

The document Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE is a part of the UPSC Course Indian Polity for UPSC CSE.
All you need of UPSC at this link: UPSC
118 videos|602 docs|204 tests

Up next

FAQs on Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity - Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

1. What is the purpose of tribunals in Indian Polity?
Ans. Tribunals in Indian Polity serve as specialized bodies that handle specific disputes or issues, providing an alternative to regular courts. They are established to ensure quick and efficient resolution of cases related to administrative, tax, environment, and other areas, thereby reducing the burden on regular courts.
2. How are members of tribunals appointed in India?
Ans. Members of tribunals in India are appointed through a transparent process. Usually, a selection committee is constituted, comprising of the Chief Justice of India or his nominee, the Secretary of the concerned ministry, and an eminent jurist. The committee recommends suitable candidates, ensuring that they possess the necessary qualifications and experience for the specific tribunal.
3. Are the decisions of tribunals final and binding?
Ans. Yes, the decisions of tribunals are generally final and binding, subject to certain exceptions. In most cases, the orders passed by tribunals can only be challenged in the High Court or the Supreme Court, and that too on limited grounds such as jurisdictional errors or violation of principles of natural justice.
4. How are tribunals different from regular courts?
Ans. Tribunals differ from regular courts in several aspects. Firstly, they are established to deal with specific areas of law and have expertise in those domains. Secondly, they follow a less formal procedure compared to regular courts, which allows for quicker disposal of cases. Lastly, the decisions of tribunals are generally not subject to multiple appeals, as they aim to provide speedy justice.
5. Can the decisions of tribunals be challenged in regular courts?
Ans. Yes, the decisions of tribunals can be challenged in regular courts, but only on limited grounds. The High Court or the Supreme Court can intervene if there are issues related to the jurisdiction of the tribunal, violation of principles of natural justice, or any procedural irregularities. However, the scope of such intervention is narrow, and the principle of tribunal supremacy is generally followed.
118 videos|602 docs|204 tests
Download as PDF

Up next

Explore Courses for UPSC exam

How to Prepare for UPSC

Read our guide to prepare for UPSC which is created by Toppers & the best Teachers
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Related Searches

Semester Notes

,

Sample Paper

,

Important questions

,

Exam

,

Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

,

Summary

,

Previous Year Questions with Solutions

,

mock tests for examination

,

pdf

,

Objective type Questions

,

video lectures

,

MCQs

,

Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

,

Free

,

past year papers

,

practice quizzes

,

Functioning Of the Tribunals - Indian Polity | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

,

ppt

,

Extra Questions

,

Viva Questions

,

study material

,

shortcuts and tricks

;