ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

● INTRODUCTION
In the late 18th & 19th century when “laissez faire’ theory” held sway, the law courts
emerged as the custodians of the rights & liberties of individual citizens. Sometimes they
protected the rights of all citizens at the cost of state authority.
The institutions through
which executive performs quasi-judicial functions are called Administrative Tribunals.
Literally, the word ‘tribunal’ means ‘seat of justice’.
It is a by product of welfare state. With the emergence of welfare state, social interest
began to be given precedence over individual rights.
These tribunals manned by technical
experts, with flexibility in operations, informality in procedures have gained importance
in adjudication process.

Administrative Tribunals have emerged with the objective of providing a new type of
justice – public good oriented justice.

┌
Administrative Adjudication –
It means determination of questions of judicial nature
by an admninistrative department or agency.It is a quasi-judicial aspect of public
administration.

Prof. L.D. White defines administrative adjudication as “the investigation and settling
of a dispute involving a private party on the basis of law and fact by an administrative
agency.”

It consists of a minister, a permanent head of departmet, special commission,

ministerial tribunal, single member tribunals and composite tribunals.
┘

The ordinary courts cannot handle socio-economic affairs and neither can they preside
oer expenditiuos issues.
In that connection, administrative tribunls are formed to preside over quasi-judicial
issues instead of ordinary courts of law.

● MEANING
Tribunal is a quasi-judicial institution that is set up to deal with problems such as
resolving administrative or tax-related disputes.
The term ‘Tribunal’ is dervied from the word ‘Tribunes’, which means ‘Magistrates of
the Classical Roman Republic.’

Blachly and Oatman describe administrative tribunals as “ authorities outside the

ordinary court system, which interpret and apply the laws when acts of public
administration are attacked in formal suits or by other established methods”

Administrative Tribunals are agencies created by specific enactments to adjucate upon

disputes that may arise in the course of implementation of provision of relevant
enactments.
They are not bound by the elaborate rules of evidence or procedures
governing the ordinary courts and they are only required to follow the procedure
prescribed by the relevant law and observe the principles of ‘NATURAL JUSTICE.’
In view of rapid growth of industry,trade & commerce, ordinary law courts are not in the
position to cope up with the workload.
A good number of situations are such that they require quick & firm action with the
capability of understanding technical problems.

According to Servai, “The development of administative law in a welfate state has made
administrative tribunals a necessity.”

Therefore, the number of administrative tribunals have been established in the country,
which can do work more rapidly, cheaply and efficiently than ordinary courts.

◙ DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRIBUNALS AND COURTS

1.
A court of law is a part of the traditional judicial system whereby judicial powers are
derived from the state.
An Administrative Tribunal is an agency created by the statute and invested with
judicial power.

2.
The Civil Courts have judicial power to try all suits of a civil nature unless the
cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred.

Tribunal is also known as the Quasi-judicial body. Tribunals have the power to try cases
of special matter which are conferred on them by statutes.
3.
Judges of the ordinary courts of law are independent of the executive in respect of their
tenure, terms and conditions of service etc.

Judiciary is independent of ExecutiveTenure, terms and conditions of the services of the

members of Administrative Tribunal are entirely in the hands of Executive (government).

4.
The presiding officer of the court of law is trained in law.

The president or a member of the 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 impartial who is not interested in the matter directly or
indirectly.

An Administrative Tribunal may be a party to the dispute to be decided by it.

6.
A court of law is bound by all the rules of evidence and procedure.

An Administrative Tribunal is not bound by rules but bound by the principles of nature of
Justice.

7.

Court must decide all questions objectively on the basis of evidence and materials on
record.

Administrative Tribunal may decide questions by taking into account departmental

policy, the decision of Administrative Tribunal may be subjective rather than objective.

8.
A court of law can decide vires of a legislation,but,

Administrative Tribunal cannot do so.

◙ CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION

Tribunals were not part of the original constitution, it was incorporated in the Indian
Constitution by 42nd Amendment Act, 1976.
Art.136 of the Constitution recognizes the status of tribunals which gives power to the
supreme court to give a special leave to appeal from any judgement, degree,sentence or
an order authorised by any tribunal of India.
Article 323-A deals with Administrative Tribunals.
Article 323-B deals with tribunals for other matters.
Under Article 323 B, the Parliament and the state legislatures are authorised to provide
for the establishment of tribunals for the adjudication of disputes relating to the
following matters:
▪Taxation
▪Foreign exchange, import and export
▪Industrial and labour
▪Land reforms
▪Ceiling on urban property
▪Elections to Parliament and state legislatures
▪Food stuff
▪Rent and tenancy rights
Articles 323 A and 323 B differ in the following three aspects:
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 (mentioned above).
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.
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.
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.

● FEATURES

1. They are neither courts nor executive body, but a mixture of both
=Judicial in sense that tribunals have to decide facts & apply them
impartially, without considering executive policy.
=Administrative because the reasons preferring them to ordinary courts of
law are administrative reasons

2. They are required to act judicially & perform quasi-judicial functions.

3. They are not bound to elaborate rules of evidence and procedures governing
ordinary courts.
 4. A tribunal possesses power of a court,i.e, it can summon witnesses, administer
oath,ask for production of documents,etc.

5. The prerogative writs of certiorari and prohibition are available against the
decisions of administrative tribunals.

6. It operates with the degree of informality which suits the nature of issues
involved. Formal rules of evidence as found in the common law courts may not be
observed.

7. It’s only required to to follow procedure prescribed by relevant law & observe
principles of ‘Nature Justice’,i.e., protection of individual and his legitimate
interests and the effective attainementof public purpose.
So, involvement of experts
in administration in regulating administrative actions is necessary to provide justice to
the citizens, without sacrificing institutional needs.

● TYPES OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

There are different kinds of tribunals which are goverened by the statutes, rules and
regulations of the Central and State Governments.

1) Concerned with protection of the public interest at the field level

As a chief custodian of public interest at district level, The District
Collector(Administrative Tribunal) possesses both original and appellate jurisdictions in
adjudicatory functions under various acts and regulations both of the state & central
governments.

2) Concerned with regulation of pvt. interest(occupation & business)

Many licensing bodies may be called tribunals because law requires them to act
judicially and courts have recognised the quasi-judicial characterof their functions.

3) Concerned with the Protection of fiscal interest of the state

These authorities are assigned significant quasi-judicial function in connection with
the adjudication of disputes arising out of levy, assessment and collection of land
revenue.

4) Concerned with the protection of Industrial Labour

Under sec.7 of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947, the State Govt. is empowered to
constitute labour courts for the adjudication of industrial disputes and perform any other
function specified in the Act.

5) Concerned with the protection of the interests of public servants

 The Administrative Reforms Commission had recommended ‘Civil Service Tribunals’
to functin as appelate authorities in respect of orders inflicting the major punishments of
dismissal or reduction in rank.

6) Having adjudicatory functions

Under Art.329b of the constitution, the govt. can constitute Election Tribunal to deal
with disputes arising out of elections to House of Parliament.

● REASONS FOR THE GROWTH OF

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Dicey’s theory of Rule Of Law states that legislaive bodies are only for making laws. The
ordinary law court is supposed to administer these laws.It is,hence, contrary to the
doctrine of Separation Of Power to establish an administrative tribunal.
However, things
have evolved with the functions of government increasing and the ordinary courts of law
are not equipped to handle situations and complex issues in the dynamic socio-economic
world in the practical sense.

1) It is faster and cheaper

Disputes regarding significant socio-economic problems are bound to arise,
therefore, special tribunals are required to deal with them speedily and cheaply.

2) They are manned by experts

It is thought to better to create special tribunals manned by subject matter experts
to deal with settlement of highly technical issues of complex nature.

3) Flexibility
In several cases, tribunals are given authority set by laws to revise its own
decisions when new facts are brought to light.

4) Experimentation and prompt action

Some cases like prevention of illegal transactions in foreign exchange, etc.,
require quick action which cannot be dealt by ordinry court of law,are presided
over to administrative tribunals.

●MERITS
1) FLEXIBILITY
It is not restrained by rigid rules of procedure and canons of evidence.
It remains in tunewith varying phases of social and economic life.

2) EXPERIMENTATION
Practical experience can be more easily utilised by amendments of laws, rules and
Regulations.

3) LESS EXPENSIVE
Procedures are simple and can be easily understood by a layman.

4) ADEQUATE JUSTICE
Adequate assets of needs of modern welfare society. Courts were more invoved in laws
and their assets.

5) RELIEF TO COURTS
Many disputes are of very ordinary nature and do not warrant the attention of highly
paid judges or a guarante of elaborate procedures and rules of evidence.

6) AVAILABILITY OF EXPERTISE
Tribunals manned by experts in the area can provide technical knowledge, which can
help in arriving at good decisions.

●DEMERITS
1) Negation of Rule Law
Tribunals with their separate laws and procedures often made by themselves,put
some serious limitaion upon the principles of rule of law.

2) Violation Of Principle Of Natural Justice

It is because the investigators lack procedural aspects so sometimes they violate the
principles due to absence of a basic set of procedures.

3) Absence Of Uniform Code Of Procedure

This results in arbitary decisions as different hearing examiners reach different,
inconsistent conclusions in similar cases.

4) Often Hold Summary Trials

It is not possible to predict course of future decisions. This is left to whims of the
tribunal.

5) ‘Independent Outloof Of A Judge’

It may be manned by administrative and technical heads who may not have
background of law or training of judicial work.
 6) Lack Of Publicity
The rules and procedures of these tribunals don’t provide publication of their
proceedings and even if published, reasons are not recorded.

●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.
o 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 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.
  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.
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.
Water Disputes Tribunal
 The Parliament has enacted Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act,
1956  have formed various Water Disputes Tribunal for adjudication of disputes
relating to waters of inter-State rivers and river valleys thereof.
o Standalone Tribunal: The Inter-State River Water Disputes
(Amendment) Bill, 2019 is passed by Parliament for amending the existing
ISRWD Act, 1956 to constitute a standalone Tribunal to remove with the need to
set up a separate Tribunal for each water dispute which is invariably a time-
consuming process.
Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT)
 It is a military tribunal in India. It was established under the  Armed Forces
Tribunal Act, 2007.
 It has provided the power for the adjudication or trial by AFT of disputes and
complaints with respect to commission, appointments, enrolments and conditions of
service in respect of persons subject to the Army Act, 1950, The Navy Act, 1957 and
the Air Force Act, 1950.
 Besides the Principal Bench in New Delhi,  AFT has Regional Benches at
Chandigarh, Lucknow, Kolkata, Guwahati, Chennai, Kochi, Mumbai and Jaipur.
o Each Bench comprises of a Judicial Member and an Administrative
Member.
 The  Judicial Members are  retired High Court Judges  and Administrative
Members  are retired Members of the Armed Forces who have held the rank
of Major General/ equivalent or above for a period of three years or more, Judge
Advocate General (JAG), who have held the appointment for at least one year are
also entitled to be appointed as the Administrative Member.
National Green Tribunal (NGT)
 The  National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995 and National Environment
Appellate Authority Act, 1997 were found to be inadequate giving rise to demand for
an institution to deal with environmental cases more efficiently and effectively.
 The Law Commission in its 186th Report suggested multi-faceted Courts with
judicial and technical inputs referring to the practice of environmental Courts in
Australia and New Zealand.
o As a result NGT was formed as a special fast-track, quasi-judicial body
comprising of judges and environment experts to ensure expeditious disposal of
cases.
 The National Green Tribunal was established in 2010 under the National Green
Tribunal Act 2010 as a  statutory body.
o It was setup for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating
to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural
resources.
o It also ensures enforcement of any legal right relating to environment
and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property.
 The Tribunal is mandated to make and endeavour for disposal of applications or
appeals finally  within 6 months of filing of the same.
 Initially, the NGT is proposed to be set up at five places of sittings and will
follow circuit procedure for making itself more accessible.
o New Delhi is the Principal Place of Sitting  of the Tribunal
and  Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai shall be the other four place of sitting
of the Tribunal.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
 Section 252 of the Income Tax Act, 1961  provides that the Central Government
shall constitute an  Appellate Tribunal  consisting of many Judicial Members and
Accountant members as it thinks fit to exercise the powers and functions conferred on
the Tribunal by the Act.

● SAFEGUARDS
1. Uniform Code Of Judical Procedure
A code of judicial procedure for administrative tribunals should be devised and
enforced.

2. Manned By Persons With Legal Training And Experience

The appointment of members should be made in consultation with the Supreme
Court.

3. Reasons Should Invariably Accompany Decision By The Tribunals

A reasoned decision goes towards those, who are affected by it,about its fairness
and check against misuseof power.
 4. The Right To Judicial Review On Point Of Law Must Remain Unimpaired
According to M.C. Setalvad, former Attorney General of India, the need for
judicial review is greater in a democratic India.

● CASE LAWS
In Bharat Bank Ltd. Vs. Employees, 1950,
The Supreme Court maintained that tribunals are not courts even though they have
Appareland practice quasi-judicil functions.

Durga ShankarMehta vs. Raguraj Singh, 1954,

Tribunal was defined by the Supreme Court when it said thatas used in Art, 136, the
Tribunal is not the same as ‘Court’ but entails all the bodies that adjudicate on
condition that they are constituted by the state and laid upon with judicial duties
differentiated from administrative and executive duties.

● CONCLUSION
The executive also perform legislative and quasi-judicial duties in the present day.
Administrative tribunals are formed to preside over quasi-judicial affairs instead of
ordinary judicial courts of law. The constitution has taken note of the status of tribunals.
The power tribunals to adjudicate is received from a statute. The reason for the
establishment of tribunals range from its quickness, cost-effectiveness, and informality
when according to justce.
Thus, we can conclude that the function of the tribunal is to
adjudicate. Tribunals, applies the law and the principles of justice,equity and good
conscious.

◙ BIBLIOGRAPHY

Administrative Theory, Author Pundrik Ojha