Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Vision VAM 2020 (Polity) Dispute Redressal Mechanisms
Vision VAM 2020 (Polity) Dispute Redressal Mechanisms
INSTITUTIONS
Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2
2. Alternative Dispute Redressal Mechanisms ............................................................................... 2
2.1. Rationale for alternative dispute resolution ....................................................................... 2
2.2. Various Types of ADR mechanisms ..................................................................................... 3
2.2.1. Mediation ..................................................................................................................... 3
2.2.2. Arbitration .................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.3. Conciliation .................................................................................................................. 6
2.2.4. Negotiation .................................................................................................................. 7
2.3. Shortcomings of ADR Mechanisms ..................................................................................... 7
2.4. Some informal Dispute Redressal Mechanisms .................................................................. 8
2.4.1. Lok Adalats ................................................................................................................... 8
2.4.2. Nyaya Panchayats ......................................................................................................... 8
2.4.3. Gram Nyayalayas .......................................................................................................... 9
2.4.4. Family courts .............................................................................................................. 10
3. Comparison between Judicial Process and various ADR process ............................................ 11
4. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 12
5. Recent Developments .............................................................................................................. 13
5.1. Online Dispute Redressal .................................................................................................. 13
5.1.1. Benefits of ODR .......................................................................................................... 13
5.1.2. Concerns related to ODR............................................................................................ 14
5.1.3. Measures that can be taken to establish ODR as effective Dispute Redressal
Mechanism ........................................................................................................................... 14
5.2. New Delhi International Arbitration Centre (NDIAC) Act .................................................. 15
6. UPSC Previous Years Mains Questions ..................................................................................... 15
7. UPSC Previous Years Prelims Question .................................................................................... 16
8. Vision IAS Mains Test Series Questions .................................................................................... 16
Dispute redressal Mechanisms and institutions are indispensable for making social life peaceful.
They try to resolve and check conflicts, which enables persons and group to maintain co-
operation. It can thus be alleged that it is the Sine qua non of social life and security of the
social order, without which it may be difficult for the individuals to carry on the life together.
Effective dispute redressal also helps in sustainable functioning of the different institutions in
polity and provide people a venue for redressing their politico-economic grievances as well.
There are two ways to resolve the dispute which may arise in day to day life of the modern
society. Either to approach Court of Law (Refer: document of Judiciary; document of Quasi-
Judicial Bodies for Administrative Tribunals) or to resort to Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
mechanism which consists of variety of approaches.
The ADR processes conform only to civil disputes, as explicitly provided by law. ADR process
may be binding or non-binding, voluntary or mandatory depending upon various circumstances
and contractual relation between the parties. In India this mechanism is not new but what is
new is its proliferation in the modern days.
In general, the entire globe of ADR can be divided under two major sub-heads: arbitration and
mediation. Arbitration is consent based adjudication processes outside the traditional judicial
system of the court by an independent person or institution, whereas mediation is a process of
settlement between the parties with the help of independent person/intuition. In ADR active
roles are envisaged to be played by the parties to dispute, lawyers representing them, the
court/forum before which dispute is brought or pending and the person/ intuitions facilitating
the settlement of dispute.
4. Conclusion
Apart from the above mentioned Dispute Resolution Mechanisms, there are several
Constitutional and statutory institutions which look into complaints filed by citizens such as
National Human Rights Commission, National Commission for Women, National Commission
for SC, National Commission for ST, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission etc.
which are covered in other documents. (Refer – Constitutional Bodies, Statutory bodies and
Quasi-Judicial Bodies document). These are all institutions constituted for providing special
focus on redressing the grievances of specific sections of society
1. With reference to the ‘Gram Nyayalaya Act’, which of the following statements is/are
correct?
1. As per the Act, Gram Nyayalayas can hear only civil cases and not criminal cases.
2. The Act allows local social activists as mediators/reconciliators. Select the correct
answer using the code given below.
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
3. Examine the need of ADR mechanisms in India and comment on their efficacy in
dispute redressal.
Approach:
• The question is about the need and efficacy of ADR mechanisms. First and foremost
one should know what ADR mechanisms are.
• The need of ADR mechanisms can be examined by highlighting the shortcomings
that exist in the formal justice system. It also needs to be explained how the ADR
mechanisms curb these shortcomings.
• Thereafter, the efficacy should be examined. While doing this, the limitations that
exist in the ADR mechanisms should be discussed. A trade-off between the
strengths and weaknesses would explain whether these are effective or not vis. a
vis. the formal justice system.
Answer:
Justice delivery system plays a fundamental role in promoting public interest and
preservation of order in the society. An effective system for resolution of disputes is
essential for dispensing justice. However, the formal justice delivery system suffers from
various limitations. Consider for instance, the following:
• To get justice through courts one has to often go through difficult and expensive
procedures involved in litigation. Moreover, there exist serious concerns regarding
costs, delays and congestion in the courts.
• Dispute resolution through legal proceedings in the courts has become excessively
procedural and adversarial in nature, thereby resulting in undue delays, high costs
and unfairness in litigation. Huge pendency of cases has created serious
implications for the trust and credibility, which the society is supposed to have in
the judicial system.
• Besides this, the adversarial nature of litigation in formal courts is found to be
unconducive to social and business relationships, which need to be preserved. Thus
this system neither generates a climate of consensus, compromise and co-
operation nor does it end in harmony. This state of affair often causes
dissatisfaction among disputants and creates a need for a more flexible means of
dispute resolution.
It is in light of these limitations that the need for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
mechanisms arise. Under ADR disputes are settled with the assistance of a neutral third
person, who is generally of parties’ own choice. Moreover, this person is usually familiar
with the nature of dispute.
5. What are the various modes of Alternate Dispute Redressal (ADR) mechanisms
available in India? Identifying the problems being faced by them, provide suggestions
needed to increase their effectiveness.
Approach:
• Introduce by mentioning the various modes of Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR).
• Mention the issues and challenges that come in their role of dispensation of justice.
• Make suggestions to improve their effectiveness.
Answer:
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to different modes of resolving legal
disputes, in addition to ordinary courts. These modes are ensured by legal provisions
such as Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and The Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996. The various modes of Alternate Dispute Redressal mechanisms in India are:
• Arbitration: A third party reviews the evidence of the case and imposes a decision
that is legally binding on both sides and enforceable with limited rights of review
and appeal. It may be mandatory or voluntary as per the contract.
• Mediation: A neutral third party assists the parties in amicably resolving their
disputes using specified communication and negotiation techniques. The mediator
only acts as a facilitator to reach a negotiated settlement and he makes no
decisions and does not impose his view of what a fair settlement should be.
• Conciliation: A voluntary process whereby the parties to a dispute use a conciliator,
who meets with the parties separately in order to resolve their differences by
lowering tensions, improving communications, exploring potential solutions and
bring about a negotiated settlement.
• Lok Adalat: They are constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. It
is a form of a public conciliation, presided over by 2 or 3 people who are judges or