Introduction to Tribunals
Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies established by law to adjudicate specific types of disputes, thereby reducing the burden on conventional courts and providing speedy, cost-effective justice, often with specialized expertise. They represent a significant reform in India's judicial landscape.
Introduced by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976, Articles 323A and 323B lay down the framework for these bodies. Article 323A specifically deals with Administrative Tribunals (like CAT and SATs), while Article 323B allows for tribunals on a range of other specified matters.
Despite their intended benefits, tribunals have faced criticism regarding their independence, infrastructure, and the potential for 'tribunalisation' leading to erosion of High Courts' jurisdiction, issues which the judiciary (notably in L. Chandra Kumar case, 1997) and recent legislative reforms have sought to address.
Why Tribunals? The Core Rationale
Reduce Court Workload
Alleviate the massive backlog of cases in traditional courts, easing pressure on the judiciary.
Provide Speedy Justice
Simplified procedures and focused adjudication aim for faster dispute resolution.
Require Specialised Knowledge
Staffed with experts, tribunals offer informed decisions in complex technical areas.
Cost-effective Justice
Generally less formal and expensive than conventional court proceedings, enhancing accessibility.
Quasi-judicial Bodies
Possess powers similar to civil courts but are not bound by strict evidence rules, allowing flexibility.
The Constitutional Foundation: 42nd Amendment, 1976
The provisions for tribunals were added to the Indian Constitution by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976. This amendment, enacted during the Emergency, was a significant step towards judicial reforms and reducing court burden.
It introduced a new Part XIV-A to the Constitution, comprising two pivotal articles:
Article 323A: Administrative Tribunals
Enabling Provision & Purpose
Enabling Legislation & Bodies
CAT Jurisdiction & Exclusions
Jurisdiction (Original)
Exclusions from CAT Jurisdiction
Article 323B: Tribunals for Other Matters
Enabling Provision
Specific Matters (Exhaustive List)
Key Distinctions: Article 323A vs. 323B
| Feature | Article 323A Tribunals | Article 323B Tribunals |
|---|---|---|
| Scope of Matters | Limited to service matters of public servants (recruitment and conditions of service). | Extends to specific, exhaustively listed matters (e.g., taxation, industrial disputes, land reforms, elections, etc.). |
| Enabling Authority | Only Parliament can establish these tribunals. | Both Parliament and State Legislatures can establish, depending on legislative competence. |
| Hierarchy/Levels | Generally a single CAT with benches, and SATs at state level. No clear hierarchy among them. | Can be established at different levels (national, state, district) as deemed appropriate. |
| Court Jurisdiction Exclusion | Original provision for exclusion of all courts' jurisdiction (later restored for HCs/SC by L. Chandra Kumar). | Similar original provision for exclusion, also modified by L. Chandra Kumar. |
| Examples | Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), State Administrative Tribunals (SATs). | National Green Tribunal (NGT), Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRT), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). |
Issues with Tribunals: The Challenge of 'Tribunalisation'
Erosion of High Court's Jurisdiction & L. Chandra Kumar Case (1997)
The original constitutional provisions (Art 323A, 323B) allowed for the exclusion of the jurisdiction of all courts (including High Courts) over matters falling under tribunals. This was seen as a major threat to the independence of the judiciary and the judicial review powers of the High Courts, which are part of the basic structure.
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)
The Supreme Court held that the provisions in Articles 323A and 323B providing for the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the High Courts and the Supreme Court were unconstitutional. It ruled that judicial review is part of the basic structure. Therefore, decisions of tribunals are subject to the judicial review of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227. Appeals from tribunals generally lie to a Division Bench of the concerned High Court, and then to the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136.
Lack of Independence
Appointment processes, tenures, and conditions of service often controlled by the executive, raising concerns about impartiality. Presence of non-judicial members can also compromise judicial character.
Pendency, Delays, Inadequate Infrastructure
Many tribunals suffer from huge backlogs, significant delays, and poor infrastructure (courtrooms, staff), defeating their purpose of speedy justice.
Multiplicity of Tribunals
Proliferation of specialized tribunals, sometimes with overlapping jurisdictions, has led to a fragmented justice system, confusion, and 'forum shopping'.
Recent Developments: Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021
The Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021, replaced by the Act, abolished several tribunals (e.g., Film Certification Appellate Tribunal, IPAB) and transferred their functions to High Courts or other existing bodies. It also introduced changes in the appointment process and term of office, often increasing executive control. This Act has been controversial and has been challenged in the Supreme Court, with the Court striking down some provisions relating to tenure and search-cum-selection committees.
Summary Table: Tribunals (Articles 323A, 323B)
| Aspect | Description |
|---|---|
| Rationale | Reduce court workload, provide speedy justice, leverage specialized knowledge. Quasi-judicial bodies. |
| Constitutional Basis | Added by 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 (Part XIV-A). |
| Article 323A: Administrative Tribunals | Enabling Authority: Only Parliament. Scope: Disputes re: recruitment and conditions of service of public servants. Key Act: Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Examples: CAT, SATs. |
| Article 323B: Tribunals for Other Matters | Enabling Authority: Parliament OR State Legislature. Scope: Specific matters exhaustively listed: Taxation, Foreign exchange, Industrial/labour, Land reforms, Urban property ceiling, Elections (except President/VP), Foodstuffs, Rent/tenancy. |
| Key Differences (323A vs 323B) | 323A: Only Parliament; only service matters; single CAT/SAT hierarchy. 323B: Parliament OR State Legislature; specific listed matters (exhaustive); can be established at different levels. |
| Issues with Tribunals (Tribunalisation) | Erosion of HC Jurisdiction (L. Chandra Kumar restored HC writ jurisdiction). Lack of Independence (executive control). Pendency, Delays, Inadequate Infrastructure. Multiplicity/Fragmentation. |
| Recent Developments | Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021: Abolished/merged several tribunals, controversial changes in appointment process (more executive control), challenged in SC. |
UPSC Ready: Prelims & Mains Notes
Prelims-ready Notes
Rationale & Constitutional Basis
Article 323A (Administrative Tribunals)
Article 323B (Other Tribunals)
Key Differences & Issues
Mains-ready Analytical Notes
Major Debates & Discussions
Historical Trends & Contemporary Relevance
Real-world Examples & Value-added Points
Current Affairs & Recent Developments
UPSC Previous Year Questions
Prelims MCQs
UPSC Prelims 2012 - NGT Act
The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 was enacted in consonance with which of the following provisions of the Constitution of India?
- Right to healthy environment, construed as a part of Right to Life under Article 21.
- Provision of grants for raising the level of administration in the Scheduled Areas for the welfare of Scheduled Tribes under Article 275(1).
- Powers and functions of Gram Sabha under Article 243A.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 2 and 3 only
- (c) 1 and 3 only
- (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (a)
Hint/Explanation: NGT is an environmental tribunal. Its establishment aligns with the right to a healthy environment, which is derived from the expansive interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life). This directly tests the link between tribunals and fundamental rights/judicial review.
UPSC Prelims 2017 - Due Process of Law
Which of the following statements correctly describes the meaning of 'due process of law'?
- (a) The principle of natural justice.
- (b) The procedure established by law.
- (c) Fair application of law.
- (d) Following due procedure prescribed in the statute.
Answer: (c)
'Due process of law' (USA concept) implies fairness, justice, and reasonableness in law application, not just procedural adherence. This differentiates it from 'procedure established by law' (India). This concept is crucial when tribunals are subjected to judicial review.
UPSC Prelims 2018 - Judicial Review
With reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements:
- No High Court shall have the jurisdiction to declare any Central law to be constitutionally invalid.
- An amendment to the Constitution of India cannot be called into question by the Supreme Court of India.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 2 only
- (c) Both 1 and 2
- (d) Neither 1 nor 2
Answer: (d)
Both statements are incorrect. High Courts can (after L. Chandra Kumar) and Supreme Court can review constitutional amendments. This question directly relates to the judicial review power over tribunals as well.
Mains Questions
UPSC Mains 2021 (GS-II) - Judicial Activism
"Judicial activism is not new to India. Analyse the various facets of judicial activism and its implications in the Indian context."
Direction:
While focusing on judicial activism, an answer can discuss how the existence of tribunals (often seen as specialized courts) has sometimes led to judicial activism from higher courts to ensure their independence or to clarify their jurisdictional boundaries (e.g., L. Chandra Kumar case).
UPSC Mains 2018 (GS-II) - Separation of Powers
"The Indian Constitution embodies the principle of 'separation of powers' but also provides for 'checks and balances' to ensure accountability." Discuss the various mechanisms through which the Supreme Court acts as a check on the powers of the Executive and the Legislature.
Direction:
This question can incorporate a discussion of tribunals as an attempt to streamline justice, and how judicial review over tribunals (post-L. Chandra Kumar) maintains the judiciary's check on quasi-judicial bodies and thus the separation of powers.
UPSC Mains 2016 (GS-II) - PIL
"Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has led to expansion of the scope of judiciary's role in India. Discuss the merits and demerits of PIL in the Indian context."
Direction:
PILs often address systemic issues that could potentially be handled by specialized tribunals if they were functioning optimally (e.g., environmental issues that could go to NGT). The failures or successes of tribunals can impact the scope of PILs taken up by higher courts.
Test Your Knowledge: Original MCQs
Question 1: Statements about Tribunals
Which of the following statements about Tribunals in India is/are correct?
- Administrative Tribunals (under Article 323A) can be established by both Parliament and State Legislatures.
- Tribunals for other matters (under Article 323B) can be established for matters like land reforms and elections to State Legislatures.
- Decisions of all Tribunals are subject to the judicial review power of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- (a) 1 and 2 only
- (b) 2 and 3 only
- (c) 1 and 3 only
- (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (b)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is incorrect: Administrative Tribunals (Art 323A) can be established by Parliament only.
Statement 2 is correct: Land reforms and elections to State Legislatures are among the matters listed under Article 323B.
Statement 3 is correct: The L. Chandra Kumar case (1997) restored the judicial review power of High Courts (Art 226/227) and the Supreme Court (Art 32) over all tribunal decisions.
Question 2: Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)
Consider the following statements regarding the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT):
- It exercises jurisdiction over service matters of All-India Services and Central Civil Services.
- Its jurisdiction extends to members of the Defence Forces.
- Appeals against the orders of CAT can be made directly to the Supreme Court.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 1 and 2 only
- (c) 2 and 3 only
- (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (a)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: CAT has jurisdiction over these service matters.
Statement 2 is incorrect: Members of the Defence Forces are specifically excluded from CAT's jurisdiction.
Statement 3 is incorrect: As per L. Chandra Kumar case (1997), appeals against CAT orders first lie to a Division Bench of the concerned High Court, and then to the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136. Direct appeal to SC is not allowed.
Deep Dive: Original Mains Questions
Question 1: Evolution & Functioning of Tribunals
"The establishment of tribunals in India was a well-intentioned reform aimed at unclogging courts and providing specialized justice. However, concerns regarding their independence and efficiency have often led to questions about their continued relevance." Critically analyze the evolution and functioning of tribunals in India, identifying the key issues and suggesting measures for their effective integration into the justice delivery system.
Key Points/Structure:
Question 2: Art 323A vs 323B & Impact on Judicial Review/Separation of Powers
Compare and contrast the provisions under Article 323A and Article 323B of the Constitution regarding the establishment of tribunals. In light of the Supreme Court's pronouncements, particularly in the L. Chandra Kumar case, discuss the impact of these Articles on the principles of judicial review and separation of powers in India.
Key Points/Structure: