AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 272

Recommendations

10.9 The pendency of cases in some of the Tribunals is suggestive of the fact that the object of setting up Tribunals is not achieved. The figures officially available as explained in Chapter 3 do not represent a satisfactory situation. In light of the detailed discussions held in the Commission and dealt with in the foregoing Chapters, the Commission makes the following recommendations, for the consideration of the Central Government namely:

A. In case of transfer of jurisdiction of High Court to a Tribunal, the members of the newly constituted Tribunal should possess the qualifications akin to the judges of the High Court. Similarly, in cases where the jurisdiction and the functions transferred were exercised or performed by District Judges, the Members appointed to the Tribunal should possess equivalent qualifications required for appointment as District Judges.

B. There shall be uniformity in the appointment, tenure and service conditions for the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Members appointed in the Tribunals. While making the appointments to the Tribunal, independence shall be maintained.

C. There shall be constituted a Selection Board/Committee for the appointment of Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Judicial Members of the Tribunal, which shall be headed by the Chief Justice of India or a sitting judge of the Supreme Court as his nominee and two nominees of the Central Government not below the rank of Secretary to the Government of India to be nominated by the Government. For the selection of Administrative Member, Accountant Member, Technical Member, Expert Member or Revenue Member, there shall be a Selection Committee headed by the nominee of the Central Government, to be appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice of India.

D. The Chairman of the Tribunals should generally be the former judge of the Supreme Court or the former Chief Justice of a High Court and Judicial Members should be the former judges of the High Court or persons qualified to be appointed as a Judge of the High Court.

Administrative Members, if required, should be such persons who have held the post of Secretary to the Government of India or any other equivalent post under the Central Government or a State Government, carrying the scale of pay of a Secretary to the Government of India, for at least two years; OR held a post of Additional Secretary to the Government of India, or any other equivalent post under the Central or State Government, carrying the scale of pay of an Additional Secretary to the Government of India, at least for a period of three years.

Expert Member/Technical Member/Accountant Member should be a person of ability, integrity and standing, and having special knowledge of and professional experience of not less than fifteen years, in the relevant domain. (can be increased according to the nature of the Tribunal).The appointment of Technical/Expert members in addition to the judicial members be made only where the Tribunals are intended to serve an area which requires specialised knowledge or expertise or professional experience and the exercise of jurisdiction involves consideration of, and decisions into, technical or special aspects.

E. While making the appointments to the Tribunal, it must be ensured that the Independence in working is maintained. The terms and conditions of service, other allowances and benefits of the Chairman shall be such as are admissible to a Central Government officer holding posts carrying the pay of Rs.2,50,000/-, as revised from time to time.

The terms and conditions of service, other allowances and benefits of a Member of a Tribunal shall be such as are admissible to a Central Government officer holding posts carrying the pay of Rs.2,25,000/-, as revised from time to time.

The terms and conditions of service, other allowances and benefits of Presiding Officer/Member of a Tribunal (to which the jurisdiction and functions exercised or performed by the District Judges are transferred) shall be such as are admissible to a Central Government officer drawing the corresponding pay of a District Judge.

F. Vacancy arising in the Tribunal should be filled up as early as possible by initiating the procedure well in time, as early as possible, preferably within six months prior to the occurrence of vacancy.

G. The Chairman should hold office for a period of three years or till he attains the age of seventy years, whichever is earlier. Whereas Vice-Chairman and Members should hold the office for a period of three years or till they attain the age of sixty seven years whichever is earlier. It will be appropriate to have uniformity in the service conditions of the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other Members of the Tribunals to ensure smooth working of the system.

H. Every order emanating from the Tribunal or its Appellate Forum, wherever it exists, attains finality. Any such order may be challenged by the party aggrieved before the Division Bench of the High Court having territorial jurisdiction over the Tribunal or its Appellate Forum.

I. The provisions of Section 3(o) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 excludes certain matters from the jurisdiction of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) and the parties aggrieved in those matters can approach the High Court under writ jurisdiction. The Act excludes the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227(4) but not under Article 226. In matters, where AFT has jurisdiction, parties must have a right to approach the High Court under Article 226 for the reason that a remedy under Article 136 is not by way of statutory appeal. The issue is pending for consideration before the larger Bench of the Supreme Court.194

194 Union of India, v. Thomas Vaidyan M, Civil Appeal No. 5327/2015, order dated 16.11.2015.

J. The Tribunals must have benches in different parts of the country so that people of every geographical area may have easy Access to Justice. Ideally, the benches of the Tribunals should be located at all places where the High Courts situate. In the event of exclusion of jurisdiction of all courts, it is essential to provide for an equally effective alternative mechanism even at grass root level. This could be ensured by providing State- level sittings looking to the quantum of work of a particular Tribunal. Once that is done, the access to justice will stand ensured.

10.10. The Law Commission of India considers it appropriate that in order to ensure uniformity in all the affairs of the Tribunals, the Central Government may consider bestowing the function of monitoring the working of the Tribunals to a single nodal agency, under the aegis of the Ministry of Law and Justice.

10.11 The concerns raised by the Supreme Court and referred to the Commission for examination, as set out in para 1.22 are addressed by detailed discussions in the relevant chapters.

(i) The subject matter in question no. 1 has been discussed threadbare with analysis of it's various aspects in Chapter - V; and on careful consideration of all relevant material the same is taken care of by the Recommendations A to G. The Commission is of the considered view that if these recommendations are implemented the rule of law will stand strengthened.

(ii) As regards question no. 2 and its varied facets, a discussion may be found in Chapter No. VII and is answered by Recommendation H. The Commission has no doubt that if this recommendation is made operational, the Supreme Court will be able to play it's 'constitutional role' and will have sufficient time to attend to the question of law, substantial constitutional issues of national or public importance and will be able to render decisions within reasonable time.

(iii) The subject matter contained in question no. 3 is discussed in Chapter No. VIII. Recommendation I addresses it stating that if Benches of the Tribunals are located at the places where the High Courts situate, the right to access to justice will not have any adverse impact.

(iv) To answer the question next raised, 'whether it is desirable to exclude jurisdiction of all courts without there being equally effective alternative mechanism for access to justice', the Commission, after comprehensive discussion in Chapter No. IX, addressed the same by way of Recommendation J, saying that it is always desirable to have an equally effective alternative mechanism before tinkering with the jurisdiction of any court by way of exclusion of the same.

10.12 The Commission is given to understand that, so far as incidental or connected matters are concerned, such matters are pending consideration before the Supreme Court and, therefore, it may not be appropriate to deal with these matters at this stage.

The Commission recommends accordingly.

Sd/-
[Dr. Justice B.S. Chauhan]
Chairman

Sd/-
[Justice Ravi R. Tripathi]
Member

Sd/-
[Prof. (Dr.) S. Sivakumar]
Member

Sd/-
[Dr. Sanjay Singh]
Member-Secretary

Sd/-
[Suresh Chandra]
Member (Ex-officio)

Sd/-
[Dr. G. Narayana Raju]
Member (Ex-officio)



Assessment of Statutory Frameworks of Tribunals in India Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys