The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down the 2021 Tribunal Reforms Act, which pertains to the appointments, tenure and service conditions of tribunal members, ruling that it violated judicial independence, Live Law reported.
A bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice Vinod Chandran noted that provisions that had been struck down by the court in its earlier judgements were reintroduced in the Act by the Union government with minor tweaks, Bar and Bench reported.
The bench held that the Act cannot be sustained as it violated constitutional principles related to the separation of powers and judicial independence, Live Law reported.
“The impugned Act directly contradicts binding judicial pronouncements that have repeatedly clarified the standards governing the appointment, tenure, and functioning of tribunal members,” Live Law quoted the judgement as saying. “Instead of curing the defects identified by this court, the impugned Act merely reproduces, in slightly altered form, the very provisions earlier struck down.”
The judgement said that this amounted to a “legislative override in the strictest sense: an attempt to nullify binding judicial directions without addressing the underlying constitutional infirmities”.
The bench added that the Act failed to remove the defects identified in prior judgements and instead re-enacted them under a new label, thereby falling “afoul of the doctrine of constitutional supremacy”, Live Law reported.
The court went on to strike down the new provisions as unconstitutional.
The bench issued the verdict on a petition filed by the Madras Bar Association in 2021 that challenged the Act as contrary to the previous rulings of the court.
The 2021 Tribunal Reforms Act had replaced the earlier 2021 Tribunals Reforms Rationalisation and Conditions of Service Ordinance, Bar and Bench reported.
Tribunals are judicial or quasi-judicial bodies that settle administrative and tax-related disputes.
In July 2021, the court had struck down Section 184 of the 2017 Finance Act as amended by the 2021 ordinance that had prescribed the tenure of tribunal members and chairpersons to four years.
This came after the court in November 2020 had ordered that the term of office of the chairperson and tribunal members should be five years. However, the Union government had introduced the 2021 ordinance that kept the tenure at four years.
The court, in its July 2021 order, had struck down this move, after which the 2021 Tribunals Reforms Act was enacted.
This 2021 legislation was then challenged by the Madras Bar Association, Congress leader Jairam Ramesh and other petitioners, Bar and Bench reported.
In the verdict on Wednesday, the bench rejected the argument presented by the Union government that a law cannot be tested on “abstract principles” such as judicial independence and separation of powers, adding that these provisions were firmly embedded in the previous rulings.
The court was quoted as saying by Live Law: “When Parliament designs or alters the tribunal system, it must do so in a manner consistent with the constitutional requirements of independence, impartiality, and effective adjudication.”
The ruling said that legislation that undermines foundational values, including by enabling executive control over appointments, curtailing tenure arbitrarily or weakening institutional autonomy, does not merely offend an “abstract principle”.
“It strikes at the core of the constitutional arrangement,” the bench said.
Until the Parliament enacts a new Act giving effect to the directions in the previous judgement, the directions given in the previous Madras Bar Association cases would continue to operate matters pertaining to appointment, qualifications, tenure, service conditions and other aspects of tribunal members and chairpersons, the court held.
The bench also noted that the appointments of tribunal members and chairpersons whose selection or recommendation by the search-cum-selection committee was completed before the 2021 Tribunal Reforms Act but whose formal appointment notifications were issued after the Act came into force shall be protected, Live Law reported.
Such appointments will continue to be governed by the parent statutes and by the conditions of service as laid down in the previous judgements rather than by the truncated tenure and altered service conditions introduced by the 2021 Act, it added.
The court also directed the Union government to form a National Tribunals Commission within four month, adding that its creation was an important safeguard to ensure independence and transparency.
The bench said that this commission must adhere to the principles set by the court, particularly concerning independence from executive control, professional expertise, transparent processes, and oversight mechanisms that reinforce public confidence in the system, Bar and Bench reported.
|
