Different Kinds of Tribunals in India: A study
Different Kinds of Tribunals in India: A Study
What are Tribunals?
Tribunals are specialized quasi-judicial bodies established to adjudicate disputes in specific areas of law or administration. They are meant to provide speedy, expert, and cost-effective justice outside regular courts.
Tribunals exercise judicial or quasi-judicial functions but differ from courts because they are typically:
Created by statute for specific purposes
Have specialized jurisdiction
More flexible in procedures than traditional courts
Categories of Tribunals in India
Tribunals in India can broadly be classified into the following kinds:
1. Administrative Tribunals
Set up under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
Purpose: To deal exclusively with service matters of government employees.
Examples:
Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)
State Administrative Tribunals
2. Tribunals for Taxation and Revenue
Deal with disputes related to taxation, revenue, customs, and excise.
Examples:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)
3. Consumer Disputes Redressal Forums
Established under the Consumer Protection Act.
Purpose: To address consumer grievances and disputes.
Examples:
District Consumer Forums
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
4. Industrial and Labour Tribunals
Deal with industrial disputes, labor issues, and employment rights.
Examples:
Industrial Tribunals
Labour Courts
Industrial Disputes Act tribunals
5. Other Specialized Tribunals
Include tribunals for environmental issues, securities, electricity, etc.
Examples:
National Green Tribunal (NGT)
Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT)
Electricity Regulatory Commissions
Important Features of Tribunals
Expertise: Tribunals have members with domain-specific expertise.
Procedural Flexibility: Less formal procedures than courts.
Relief from Judicial Overload: Reduce the burden on traditional courts.
Statutory Authority: Created and governed by specific laws.
Key Case Laws on Tribunals in India
1. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)
Issue: Whether decisions of tribunals are subject to judicial review by the High Courts and Supreme Court.
Held: The Supreme Court ruled that tribunals are subject to judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 (High Courts) and Article 136 (Supreme Court).
Significance: Reinforced the supervisory jurisdiction of courts over tribunals to maintain rule of law and prevent abuse of power.
2. K.C. Vasanth Kumar v. Union of India (1993)
Issue: Constitutionality of the Administrative Tribunals Act.
Held: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Administrative Tribunals, stating that Parliament can provide alternative forums for service disputes.
Significance: Validated the role of tribunals in easing judicial workload.
3. R. Gandhi v. Union of India (2010)
Issue: Questioned the independence of members of the Administrative Tribunal.
Held: The Supreme Court emphasized the need for independence and impartiality of tribunal members, similar to judges.
Significance: Strengthened the standards for tribunal appointments.
4. M. Nagendra Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1994)
Issue: Whether the tribunal's decisions are final and immune from judicial scrutiny.
Held: Decisions are subject to judicial review for jurisdictional errors, violation of natural justice, or constitutional validity.
Significance: Established limits on tribunal powers ensuring judicial accountability.
5. National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation v. Alimenta (1998)
Issue: Delays and inefficiencies in tribunals.
Held: Supreme Court called for procedural reforms and speeding up tribunal proceedings.
Significance: Highlighted need for tribunal efficiency and timely justice.
6. V. S. V. Sundaram v. Union of India (1992)
Issue: Jurisdiction of Consumer Forums vs Civil Courts.
Held: Consumer Forums have exclusive jurisdiction over consumer disputes.
Significance: Strengthened consumer protection through specialized tribunals.
Challenges Faced by Tribunals
Delay in disposal of cases defeating the purpose of quick justice.
Lack of adequate infrastructure and resources.
Interference and overlapping jurisdiction with regular courts.
Question of independence and appointment procedures.
Conclusion
Tribunals in India play a vital role in delivering specialized justice efficiently. While they provide relief from judicial overload and bring expertise into decision-making, judicial review and accountability ensure they function within constitutional limits.
Through key judgments, the Supreme Court has:
Affirmed the constitutional validity of tribunals.
Emphasized the importance of their independence.
Maintained judicial supervision over tribunals to protect rights and uphold justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments