Tribunals
A tribunal is a quasi judicial body established by law to resolve specific types of disputes such as administrative dispute, tax dispute, environment or company law, etc. The concept of tribunal was brought through 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 197 on the recommendation of Sardar Suaran Singh's committee and part 14A was added and two separate articles i.e. 323A and 323B was created.
Article 323A and 323B
| 323A | 323B |
|---|---|
| Administrative tribunal | Other tribunal matters |
| Limited exclusively to public service matters, recruitment terms and conditions of service, related disputes of civil servants of state, centre or local authority. | Covers a broad range of specified socio-economic subjects such as taxation, matters such as foreign exchange, industrial disputes, labour disputes, etc. |
| Only parliament can established by law. | Both by parliament and state legislature within their respective legislative competency under 7th Schedule. |
| No hierarchy. Permits only one tribunal for the centre i.e. CAT and one for a state i.e. SAT and joint tribunal can also be established i.e. JAT | Hierarchy is permitted. Tribunal may have 2-tier structure, e.g. trial tribunal and appellate tribunal. |
| e.g. CAT, SAT and JAT | e.g. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, National Green Tribunal, Security Appellate Tribunal, etc. |
Tribunalization of Justice
Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India, 2010
The issue was constitutional validity of NCLT and NCLAT established under Companies Act, 1956 was challenged, which was included from 2003.
The Supreme Court in this case although said NCLT and NCLAT are constitutional but tribunals are substitute of High courts and therefore selection committee must be dominated by judicial members not executive.
Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India, 2014
In this case National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005 was challenged as the parliament transfer the tax jurisdiction of High Courts to National Tax Tribunal.
Therefore Supreme Court struck down entire NTT act as unconstitutional and the Supreme Court said Parliament can not take away the essential judicial functions.
Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India, 2019 (Roger Matthew Case)
Finance Act, 2017 and Tribunal Rules, 2017 was brought and challenged. These rules were framed and member tenures reduced to 3 years across 19 tribunals.
The Supreme Court struck down Tribunal Rules, 2017 and said that adequate tenure is essential for independence of tribunal.
Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India, 2020
Tribunal Rules 2020 was formed, the tenure was given for 4 years but however executive control of Search cum Selection Committee was there.
The Supreme Court struck down 4 year tenure and directed minimum 5 year tenure. Supreme court also said independent and transparent process is necessary for judiciary.
Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India, 2021
The government brought Tribunal Reform Ordinance, reintroduced 4 year tenure and 50 year minimum age limit and two names were to be send by selection panel.
Supreme Court said it is unconstitutional. You can not have favouritism and bypass the Supreme Court's own judgement.
Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India, 2025
Tribunal Reform 2021 was now brought and it was challenged in Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India, 2025. The government despite the ordinance being struck down parliament again same provision- 4 year tenure, 50 year minimum age bar and same two name panel.
Supreme Court said impermissible legislative override. Supreme Court directed Union of India to constitute National Tribunal Commission which was recommended by Supreme Court in 2020 only. The Supreme Court struck down the ordinance citing basic structure.
New Tribunals Act, 2026
- Structure, strength and bench
- Composition
- Tribunal generally consist of 3 members:
- Chairperson
- Judicial Member
- Technical and administrative member
- Tribunal generally consist of 3 members:
- Strength
- The exact number of total member is not uniform, it is determined by central government on the caseload volume.
- Cases are usually heard by benches involving one judicial member and one technical member.
- Composition
- Tenure and age limits
- Fixed tenure of 5 years, restored from the previously restricted 4 year term.
- The chairperson will work up to 70 years and members 67 years.
- Search cum Selection Committee will select the person.
- In the committee chairperson will be Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court Judge nominated by Chief Justice of India. It has a casting vote.
- Judicial member
- Outgoing chairperson, sitting/retired Supreme Court judge High Court Chief Justice.
- Having only one vote
- Executive Members
- Two secretaries to the government of India having only one vote.
- Sponsoring ministry act as a convener without voting rights.
- They will recommend the name to central government and central government will issue the official notification of appointment.
It is noted that President does not directly nominated tribunal members or appoints he just gives assents. For appointment formal executive approval comes through appointment committee of the cabinet based strictly on the recommendation of search cum selection committee. The government must make the appointment within 3 months of receiving the recommendation. The search cum selection recommend only one primary name and one waiting list eliminating executive option of pick and choose my name.