Context:

The Supreme Court of India recently struck down several provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 for violating constitutional norms governing the independence and functioning of tribunals.

Background of the Conflict:

The dispute began in 2017 when the Finance Act empowered the Centre to frame rules for tribunals. However, the Supreme Court struck down these rules in 2019, citing undermined judicial independence.

·        Despite this, the Centre promulgated a tribunal act, fixing the tenure of tribunal members at four years and setting a minimum appointment age of 50 years.

Key Judicial Findings:

Executive Dominance Undermines Judicial Independence

The Court found that the Act enabled:

• • • Excessive executive control over appointments of tribunal chairpersons and members
    • Government discretion in fixing salaries and service conditions
    • Arbitrary curtailment of tenure

These were held to be fundamentally inconsistent with the constitutional requirements for an independent and impartial tribunal system.

Legislative Override is Impermissible

The Court rejected the government argument that Parliament was free to disregard Supreme Court judgments.

• • • The Chief Justice held that Parliament cannot re-enact invalidated measures, except to cure the constitutional defect identified by the Court.
    • The Act amounted to a “legislative override” of a binding judgment, which violates the principles of judicial review—part of the basic structure.

Establishment of the National Tribunal Commission (NTC):

The Court stated that tribunals have long suffered from:

• • • inconsistent appointment processes
    • lack of administrative independence
    • inadequate service conditions

Thus, the Court directed the Union Government to establish a National Tribunal Commission within four months, calling it an “essential structural safeguard.”

Role envisioned for NTC:

• • Oversee appointments
  • Ensure transparent selection processes
  • Maintain uniformity in service conditions
  • Act as the central administrative authority for tribunals

About Tribunals:

Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies set up to provide a faster, more specialized, and cost-effective alternative to regular courts for resolving specific types of disputes. They were introduced in India through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976, under Articles 323A and 323B of the Constitution.

·         Purpose: To reduce the burden on traditional courts and ensure speedy justice in specialized areas.

·         Nature: They have judicial powers but are not full-fledged courts; members often include both judicial and technical experts.

·         Specialization: Each tribunal deals with a specific area, such as administration, taxation, or the environment.

·         Constitutional Basis:

o    Article 323A – Administrative Tribunals (e.g., for government service matters).

o    Article 323B – Other Tribunals (e.g., for taxation, industrial disputes, land reforms).

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 marks a decisive reaffirmation of constitutional supremacy and judicial independence. The Court made it clear that executive-heavy tribunal structures cannot coexist with India’s constitutional vision. By mandating the creation of a National Tribunal Commission, the Court has laid the groundwork for long-term structural reform - ensuring that tribunals remain independent, impartial, and effective instruments of justice.