LEGAL STUDIES

CLASS XII

UNIT 2: ADMINISTRATIVE REDRESSAL MECHANISM

(SET 1)

By- Mrs. Rajauriya

TRIBUNALS : INTRODUCTION
The term ‘Tribunal’ is derived from the word ‘Tribunes’, which means ‘Magistrates of the Classical
Roman Republic’. Tribunal is referred to as the office of the ‘Tribunes’ i.e., a Roman official under the
monarchy and the republic with the function of protecting the citizen from arbitrary action by the
aristocrat magistrates.

Tribunal is a quasi-judicial institution that is set up to deal with problems such as resolving
administrative or tax-related disputes. It performs a number of functions like adjudicating disputes,
determining rights between contesting parties, making an administrative decision, reviewing an existing
administrative decision and so forth.

A Tribunal, generally, is any person or institution having an authority to judge, adjudicate on, or to
determine claims or disputes – whether or not it is called a tribunal in its title.

There are many ways to resolve disputes, and they don’t all involve a trial before a judge in court.
Administrative tribunals run parallel to the court system. Although administrative tribunals may
resemble courts because they make decisions about disputes, they are not part of the court system. An
Administrative Tribunal is neither a Court nor an executive body. It stands somewhere midway between
a Court and an administrative body.

There are two significant differences between administrative tribunals and courts:

Administrative tribunals are set up to be less formal, less expensive, and a faster way to resolve disputes
than by using the traditional court system.

Tribunal members who make decisions (adjudicators) usually have special knowledge about the topic
they are asked to consider. Judges, however, are expected to have general knowledge about many areas
of law, not particular expertise about the law in the case they are hearing.

In a tribunal hearing, your case may be heard by one adjudicator sitting alone, or by a panel of several
adjudicators if the matter is complicated. These adjudicators have special training and experience to
conduct hearings, but they are not judges. But, like a trial in court before a judge, the adjudicators are
responsible for conducting fair hearings and making final decisions on the issues. They do this by
considering the evidence and applying the legislation, case law, and policies that relate to your case.

Who establishes administrative tribunals?

Tribunals are normally established by federal or provincial legislation or through municipal bylaws.
NEED OF TRIBUNAL:

• The primary reason for the creation of Tribunals was to overcome the crisis of delays and
backlogs in the administration of justice.
• To overcome the situation that arose due to the pendency of cases in various Courts, domestic
tribunals and other Tribunals have been established under different Statutes, hereinafter
referred to as the Tribunals.
• The Tribunals were set up to reduce the workload of courts, to expedite decisions and to
provide a forum which would be manned by lawyers and experts in the areas falling under the
jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
• The tribunals perform an important and specialised role in justice mechanism. They take a load
off the already overburdened courts. They hear disputes related to the environment, armed
forces, tax and administrative issues.
• The delay in justice administration is one of the biggest obstacles which have been tackled with
the establishment of Tribunals.

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
The judicial system of India is divided into three tiers.

• The subordinate courts are vested with the original jurisdiction in all matters except those,
which are barred either expressly or impliedly.
• The High courts in general have appellate and revisional jurisdiction in the respective States
along with the jurisdiction to issue prerogative writs. Some of the High Courts have original
jurisdiction. The High Courts also entertain appeals/writs against the judgments rendered by
some of the Tribunals.
• The Supreme Court has been conferred with original jurisdiction under Article 131(disputes
between two or more States, or between the Government of India and one or more States, or
disputes arising out of the election of the President and Vice-President of India) and advisory
jurisdiction under Article 143, where the President of India may seek the opinion of the Court on
a particular issue of fact or law of general public importance. It can issue the prerogative writs
under Article 32 of the Constitution and has appellate jurisdiction against the orders passed by
the High Courts, Tribunals or the Appellate Tribunals established under various Statutes.

HISTORY OF TRIBUNALS IN INDIA

History of tribunals in India stands reflected dating back to the year 1941,when first Tribunal was
established in the form of Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal.

The Tribunals were however, set up to reduce the workload of courts, to expedite decisions and to
provide a forum which would be manned by lawyers and experts in the areas falling under the
jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act of 1976 brought about a massive change in the
adjudication of disputes in the country. It provided for the insertion of Articles 323-A and 323-B in the
Constitution of India, whereby the goal of establishment of Administrative Tribunals by the Parliament
as well as the State Legislatures, to adjudicate the matters specified in the sub-clauses is made possible.

ARTICLE 323 A gives exclusive powers to the Parliament constitute Tribunals for the respective subjects
specified therein.

ARTICLE 323 B gives power to the concerned State Legislature which is concurrent in nature by which
the Parliament and the State Legislature can, constitute Tribunals for the respective subjects specified
therein.

• Articles 323 A and 323 B differ in the following three aspects:

o While Article 323 A contemplates the establishment of tribunals for public service
matters only, Article 323 B contemplates the establishment of tribunals for certain other
matters .
o While tribunals under Article 323 A can be established only by Parliament, tribunals
under Article 323 B can be established both by Parliament and state legislatures with
respect to matters falling within their legislative competence.
 o Under Article 323 A, only one tribunal for the Centre and one for each state or two or
more states may be established. There is no question of the hierarchy of tribunals,
whereas under Article 323 B a hierarchy of tribunals may be created.
o Article 262: The Indian Constitution provides a role for the Central government in
adjudicating conflicts surrounding inter-state rivers that arise among the state/regional
governments.

TRIBUNALS IN INDIA:

Administrative Tribunals

• Administrative Tribunals was set-up by an act of Parliament, Administrative Tribunals

Act, 1985. It owes its origin to Article 323 A of the Constitution.
It adjudicates disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and
conditions of service of persons appointed to the public service and posts in
connection with the affairs of the Union and the States.
• The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 provides for three types of tribunals:
o The Central Government establishes an administrative tribunal called
the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT).
o The Central Government may, upon receipt of a request in this behalf
from any State Government, establish an administrative tribunal for
such State employees.
o Two or more States might ask for a joint tribunal, which is called the
Joint Administrative Tribunal (JAT), which exercises powers of the
administrative tribunals for such States.
• There are tribunals for settling various administrative and tax-related disputes, including
Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Customs,
Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), National Green Tribunal (NGT),
Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) and Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT),
among others.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL:

• It has jurisdiction to deal with service matters pertaining to the Central Government
employees or of any Union Territory, or local or other government under the control of
the Government of India, or of a corporation owned or controlled by the Central
Government.
o The CAT was set-up on 1 November 1985.
o The CAT was created by the Act in 1985 under Article 323A of the Constitution
of India
o It has 17 regular benches, 15 of which operate at the principal seats of High
Courts and the remaining two at Jaipur and Lucknow.
 o These Benches also hold circuit sittings at other seats of High Courts. The
tribunal consists of a Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Members.
o The Members are drawn, both from judicial as well as administrative streams so
as to give the Tribunal the benefit of expertise both in legal and administrative
spheres.
• The appeals against the orders of an Administrative Tribunal shall lie before the Division
Bench of the concerned High Court.

CAT Functioning:

The following are some of the features of the CAT’s functioning:

• The Tribunal has been conferred the power to exercise the same jurisdiction and
authority regarding contempt of itself as a High Court.

• Appeals against the orders of a tribunal could be made in the High Court (and not the SC
directly - Chandra Kumar Case, 1997).

• The CAT has 17 Benches in the country as well as 21 Circuit Benches.

• The CAT Principal Bench deals with matters of the Government of the National Capital
Territory of Delhi.

• In deciding cases, the Tribunal is guided by the principles of natural justice. It is not bound
by the Civil Procedure Code.

• The central government decides the salaries, emoluments and conditions of service of the
Tribunal’s employees.

• A petitioner can either appear in person before the Tribunal or take the help of a legal
practitioner.

STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

Article 323 B empowers the state legislatures to set up tribunals for various matters like
levy, assessment, collection and enforcement of any of the tax matters connected with land
reforms covered by Article 31A.

CHARACTERISTICS OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

• Administrative Tribunal is a creation of a statute.

• An Administrative Tribunal is vested in the judicial power of the State and thereby performs
quasi-judicial functions as distinguished from pure administrative functions.
• Administrative Tribunal is bound to act judicially and follow the principles of natural justice.
• It is required to act openly, fairly and impartially.
 • An Administrative Tribunal is not bound by the strict rules of procedure and evidence
prescribed by the civil procedure court.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRIBUNAL AND COURT

• Administrative Tribunals and Ordinary Courts both deal with the disputes between the parties
which affects the rights of the subjects.
• Administrative Tribunal is not a court. Some notable differences between a court and
Administrative Tribunal are as follows –

NO. COURT OF LAW TRIBUNAL

1. A court of law is a part of the traditional An Administrative Tribunal is an

Judicial system whereby judicial powers agency created by the statute and
are derived from the state. invested with judicial power.
2. The Civil Courts have judicial power to try Tribunal is also known as the Quasi-
all suits of a civil nature unless the judicial body. Tribunals have the
cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred. power to try cases of special matter
which are conferred on them by
statutes.
3. Judges of the ordinary courts of law are Tenure, terms and conditions of the
independent of the executive in respect services of the members of
of their tenure, terms and conditions of Administrative Tribunal are
service etc. Judiciary is independent of entirely in the hands of Executive.
Executive.
4. The presiding officer of the court of law is The President or the member of the
trained in law. Tribunal may not be trained as well in
Law. He may be an expert in the field
of Administrative matters.
5. A judge of a court of law must be An Administrative Tribunal may be a
impartial who is not interested in the party to the dispute to be decided by
matter directly or indirectly. It.
6. A court of law is bound by all the An Administrative Tribunal is not
rules of evidence and procedure. bound by rules but bound by the
principles of nature of Justice.
7. Court must decide all questions Administrative Tribunal may decide
objectively on the basis of evidence questions by taking into account
and materials on record. departmental policy, the decision of
Administrative Tribunal may be
subjective rather than objective.

*************************************************************************************