Context : In a significant verdict upholding judicial independence, a Supreme Court Bench led by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai has struck down key provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021. The Court termed the law a “repackaged version” of an Ordinance previously struck down in July 2021.
Why did the Supreme Court Strike Down the Provisions?
The Court observed that the 2021 Act violated the core constitutional requirement of institutional autonomy in the following ways:
- Executive Dominance: The Act gave the Union government excessive control over the appointment of members and the functioning of tribunals.
- Violation of Precedent: The Bench noted that the legislation disregarded previous SC judgments (such as the Madras Bar Association case) by re-enacting provisions that were already declared unconstitutional.
Constitutional & Statutory Framework of Tribunals
- Definition: Quasi-judicial bodies designed to resolve disputes regarding administration, taxation, environment, and specific technical matters.
- Origin: Incorporated into the Constitution via the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976.
Key Articles:
- Article 323-A: Deals exclusively with Administrative Tribunals (public service matters).
- Article 323-B: Deals with tribunals for other subjects (Taxation, Foreign Exchange, Industrial Disputes, Land Reforms, etc.).
Key Provisions: Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021
- Enacted to streamline the tribunal system following the SC ruling in Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India (2021).
- Rationalization of Bodies: Dissolves several appellate tribunals and transfers their jurisdiction to High Courts or Civil Courts.
Search-cum-Selection Committee:
- Central Level: Headed by the CJI (or nominee); includes two Government Secretaries and a retired SC/HC Judge/Chairperson.
- State Level: Headed by the Chief Justice of the High Court; includes the Chief Secretary and Chairman of the State PSC.
Tenure & Eligibility:
- Term: Fixed at 4 years.
- Minimum Age: 50 years for appointment.
- Retirement Age: 70 years for Chairpersons; 67 years for Members.
- Removal: The Central Government retains the power to remove members based on the Committee’s recommendation.
Critical Challenges Facing Tribunals
- Persistent Vacancies: A severe shortage of judicial and technical members has led to high pendency, particularly affecting the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) resolution timelines.
- Infrastructural Deficits: Inadequate physical infrastructure and a lack of digital case management systems hinder bodies like the National Green Tribunal (NGT).
- Procedural Inefficiency: Frequent adjournments have resulted in 67% of insolvency cases breaching the mandatory 330-day timeline.
- Lack of Autonomy: Administrative dependence on the Finance Ministry and perceived political indifference hamper resource allocation and independent functioning.
