Supreme Court versus Government, on the Tribunals issue

The issue of Tribunal appointments has reached a flashpoint.

 

 Supreme Court versus Government, on the Tribunals issue

---

Read more on - Polity | Economy | Schemes | S&T | Environment

---

• The story: The Supreme Court on 6th Sept, 2021, criticized the Union Government over the delay in filling up of the vacancies in multiple Tribunals and also for passing the Tribunals Reforms Act, which it termed a "virtual replica of the provisions struck down by the Court".
• The bench: A special bench comprising Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice L Nageswara Rao conveyed to the Solicitor General of India (SG) Tushar Mehta the displeasure of the Court regarding the state of affairs of the Tribunals.

1. It said that there was no respect to judgments of the court. The government was testing its patience.
2. It enquired about the number of persons appointed to the Tribunals, after the earlier order was issued.
3. It said that the new Tribunals Act was a copy of the provisions struck down by SC in the Madras Bar Association case

• Specific query: Justice Nageswara Rao, who authored the last two Madras Bar Association judgments, sought to know from the Solicitor General why the appointments had not been made in line with the various directions passed by the Court. The bench said that the government was weakening and killing the Tribunals by not appointing members. Many Tribunals were already on the verge of closing down.
• What are the options: An upset CJI said that the Court had only three options.

1. One, it could stay the legislation.
2. Two, it could close down the Tribunals and give the powers to the High Courts.
3. Three, it could make the appointments directly.

• Impacting the national economy: The bench said that the functioning of Tribunals like NCLT and NCLAT was stalled due to the lack of members. These were critical for Indian economy, and vacancies had ruined all timelines. With NCLT and NCLAT not being manned, a critical situation has arisen. Same situation remains with the AFTs also. The SG informed that the Ministry of Finance had said the final decision on the recommendations made by the Search-cum-Selection Committees will be made soon.
• Strong action: The bench posted the matter to a week later, and expected appointments to be done by then. It issued notice on a writ petition challenging the Tribunals Reforms Act 2021. The key complaint is that it's a re-enactment of the very same provisions struck down by the Court earlier!

1. Justice Chandrachud said that while the legislature can take away the basis of a judgment, it cannot pass a law which is contrary to a judgment. (The government can't enact a law directly contrary to SC's judgement)
2. The SC made it clear that there would be no more arguments.

• Summary: This matter of Tribunal appointments has now reached a flashpoint, and the Supreme Court is in no mood to entertain any request from the government, due to multiple reasons. It is after a long time that the SC has struck hard on a constitutional issue of grave importance.
• EXAM QUESTIONS: (1) Compare and contrast the powers and responsibilities of Tribunals and Courts. Why were they made? (2) Why did the Supreme Court pull up the government on the continuing delay in Tribunals, in the September hearing? Explain. (3) What happens when Tribunals are not manned fully? Explain.

Read more on - Polity | Economy | Schemes | S&T | Environment

#Tribunals #SupremeCourt #HighCourts #Jurisprudence #Appointments #UnionGovernment

 

Join UPSC Self Prep course | Online Course (PT Gurukul)  | Covid Special Course | Join PT courses