Apex Court Judgement On Tribunal Awards Needs Revisit: Law Commission

A Supreme Court judgement which allowed High Courts to hear appeals against Administrative Tribunal awards needs a ‘revisit,’ according to expert opinion. The suggestion to ‘revisit’ the matter came in a Law Commission of India Report forwarded by chairman A R Lakshmanan to Law and Justice Minister Hans Raj Bhardwaj last Wednesday. Administrative tribunals-- Central, State or Joint-- were created pursuant to the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to handle service disputes, a large number of which were pending before various courts. The idea: reduce courts burden and give speedy relief to aggrieved public servants. Administrative Tribunals were intended as an effective substitute for High Courts. But in 1997, a seven-Judge Supreme Court Bench held clause 2 (d) of article 323A and clause 3(d) of article 323B ‘unconstitutional’ in as much as they let Parliament exclude the jurisdiction of the High Courts and the Supreme Court. The Court held that the jurisdiction conferred upon the High Courts under articles 226/227 and upon the Supreme Court under article 32 of the Constitution was part of its inviolable basic structure. All Administrative Tribunals decisions thereby became subject to scrutiny before a concerned High Court Division Bench. As a result, Tribunals orders were routinely appealed against in High Courts. A Bill was introduced in Rajya Sabha in March 2006-- Administrative Tribunals (Amendment) Bill-- to among other things provide for appeal to High Court. But the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice pointed out that appeal to High Court ‘is unnecessary,’ and ‘should lie to the Supreme Court only.’ Studying the matter suo motu, the Law Commission concluded that the Administrative Tribunals were conceived as a real substitute for High Courts in service matters. ‘The power of judicial review of the High Courts cannot be called as inviolable as that of the Supreme Court. ‘The very objective behind the establishment of the Administrative Tribunals is defeated if all the cases adjudicated by them have to go before the concerned High Courts. ‘If one appeal is considered to be a must, an intra-tribunal appeal would be the best option, and then the matter can be taken to the Supreme Court by way of special leave petition under Article 136,’ it said. The Law Commission held that L Chandra Kumar’s case ‘needs to be revisited by a Larger Bench of the Supreme Court or necessary and appropriate amendments may be effected in the Act in accordance with law.’

"Loved reading this piece by Prakash Yedhula?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group