Case: L.

Chandra Kumar vs Union Of India And Others on 18 March, 1997

BENCH: A.M. Ahmadi CJI & M.M. Punchhi & K. Ramaswamy & S.P. Bharucha & S.
Saghir Ahmad & K. Venkataswami & K.T. Thomas

Facts : Pursuant to Article 323-A and 323-B of the Constitution of India the Central
Administrative Tribunal, with five Benches, was established on November 1, 1985. However,
even before the Tribunal had been established, several writ petitions had been filed in various
High Courts as well as the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional validity of Article
323-A, on the ground that it is contrary to the spirit of the Constitution as it excludes the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution and the High Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Issues: Whether the power conferred upon the Parliament by Article 323-A (2) (d) or upon
the State Legislature by Article 323-B (3) (d) of the Constitution of India, to totally exclude
the jurisdiction of ‘all courts’, except that of the Supreme Court under Article 136 ?

Whether the Tribunals constituted either under Article 323A or under Article 323B of the
Constitution, possess the competence to test the constitutional validity of a statutory
provision or rule?

Observation by court: The court found that the main intention behind the Act was to provide
for a self-contained, self-sufficient and exclusive forum of adjudicating all service related
matters. But it made it clear that it was intended to perform a substitution role and not a
supplemental role.
It held that the jurisdiction of the Tribunals would be subject to the review of the High Court
under Articles 226/227.

Conclusion: Power of judicial review over legislative action vested in the High Courts and
the Supreme Court under Articles 226 and 32 respectively is the basic structure of the
Constitution. Power of judicial superintendence over decisions of all courts and Tribunals
within their jurisdiction is the basic structure of the Constitution