Dinesh Singh Chauhan, Advocate
Historical background of Central Administrative Tribunal
The Tribunals in India have a very engaging history, dating back to the year 1941, when the first Tribunal in the form of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, was established. After independence for a long time, a search was going on for a mechanism to relieve the courts, including High Courts, and the Supreme Court, from the burden of service litigation, which formed a substantial portion of pending litigation. As early as 1958, this problem engaged the attention of the Law Commission, which recommended for the establishment of Tribunals consisting of Judicial and Administrative members to decide service matters.3 In 1969, Administrative Reforms Commission also recommended for the establishment of civil service tribunals, both for the Central and State civil servants. Central Government appointed a Committee under the Chairmanship of J. C. Shah, of the Supreme Court of India in 1969, which also made similar recommendation. In 1975, Swaran Singh Committee again recommended for the setting up of Service Tribunals. The idea of setting up Service Tribunals also found favour with the Supreme Court, which in [Kamala Kanti Dutta Vs Union of India (1980) 4 SCC 38; 1980 SCC (L&S) 485; AIR 1980 SC 20 2056] advocated for setting up of Service Tribunals to save the Courts from avalanche of Writ Petitions and appeals in service matters. In the meantime, various States had established their own Service Tribunals. It was against this backdrop that Parliament passed the 42nd Amendment, which added Part XIV-A in the Constitution of India. Articles 323-A and 323-B of Constitution of India enabled Parliament to constitute Administrative Tribunals for dealing with certain matters specified therein. The Enactment of Administrative Tribunals Act in 1985 opened a new chapter in administering Justice to the aggrieved Government servants in Service Matters. Article 323-A provided that Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication or trial by Administrative Tribunals of disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and conditions of services of persons appointed to Public Services and Posts in connection with the affairs of the Union, or of any State, or of any local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India, or of any Corporation owned or controlled by the Government. Parliament passed a law to establish Administrative Tribunals in India. Parliament was further empowered to prescribe by law the jurisdiction, power, authority and procedure of such tribunals and also to exclude the jurisdiction of all Courts except that of the Supreme Court under Article 136 of Constitution. Empowered by these enabling provisions of the Constitution, Parliament enacted Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for the establishment of Administrative Service Tribunals for deciding service disputes of civil servants of the Centre as well as of the States which was amended in 1986. Thus the enactment of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 opened a new chapter in administering justice to the aggrieved Government servants. It owes its origin to Article 323-A which empowers the Central Government to set up by an Act of Parliament, the Administrative Tribunals for adjudication of disputes and complaints with respective recruitment and conditions of services of persons appointed to the Public Services and Posts in connection with the Union and the States. The Act visualizes a Central Administrative Tribunal [CAT] for the Centre and State Administrative Tribunal for a particular State.
Hence, Tribunals play a very important role and Tribunals have been increasing since from 1947 especially after 1976. The 42nd Amendment Act of Indian Constitution inserted Article 323-A and Article 323-B. Tribunals function differently from Courts, from the manner of appointment to the procedure followed, yet they seek to achieve the same objective as that of Courts- to deliver Justice.
The CAT had been established under Article 323-A for adjudication of disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or other authorities under the control of the Government. In the statement of object and reasons on the introduction of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 it was mentioned:
“It is expected that the setting up of such Administrative Tribunals to deal exclusively with service matters would go a long way in not only reducing the burden of the various Courts and thereby giving them more time to deal with other cases expeditiously but would also provide to the persons covered by the Administrative Tribunals speedy relief in respect of their grievances.”
Initially the decision of the Tribunal could be challenged before Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing Special Leave Petition. However, after the Supreme Court's decision in L. Chandra Kumar's case, the orders of Central Administrative Tribunal are now being challenged by way of Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution before respective High Court in whose territorial jurisdiction the Bench of the Tribunal is situated.
Objective for the establishment of Administrative Tribunals
a. To provide for a forum to deal exclusively with service matters which off loaded the burden of the cases of High Court from their jurisdiction;
b. To provide inexpensive and speedy relief to Government servants in service matters;
c. To provide special powers to the Tribunals to make their own special powers and procedures and not be guided by the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 or the Law of Evidence but to work according to rules of natural justice.
d. As far as creation of Tribunals is concerned constitution is silent. No express provision in the Constitution of India, as it stood originally, provides for the establishment of Tribunals. However, Articles 262 (2) and 263 (1) of the Constitution are important in this regard.
* Article 262 (2) of the Constitution provides for the creation of Tribunal to adjudicate the disputes relating to water of interstate rivers or valleys.
* Article 263 (1) of the Constitution provides for creation of Council charged with the duty of inquiry into the disputes between States. Apart from these two Articles, the creation of Tribunals is implied in the Articles 136, 226 and 227 of the Constitution as the term ‘Tribunal' is used in these Articles. However, Forty Second Constitutional Amendment expressed the provision for the creation of Tribunals. This Amendment opened the possibility for the proliferation of the Tribunals system in the country.
* Article 323-A empowers the Parliament to establish Service Tribunals, which will deal with the service matters i.e., recruitment, conditions of service of persons appointed to Public Services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or any State or any local or other authority in India or under the control or owned by the Government and Article 323-B empowers the appropriate legislature to provide the law, for adjudication or trial by Tribunals of any disputes and offences with respect to several matters.
* Further the Article 323-B is wide amplitude and it provides that Tribunals may try certain criminal offences also. In 1985, Parliament passed the Administrative Tribunals Act in pursuant of Article 323-A.
* And under Article 323-B, the Parliament and State legislatures are passing law from time to time which provided for the creation of Tribunals. The work assigned to the Tribunal is very complex in nature. It requires qualified and experienced members to the adjudication of the subject matters.
CONCLUSION
In view of the increasing role of administration in citizens' life, the Administrative Tribunals are expected to play an important role in the redressal of citizens' grievances. Tribunals are essentially those bodies of the Executive branch of the Government who by virtue of some statutory provision have the power and duty to act Judicially in determining disputes which come before it. Tribunals as stated earlier are distinct from the ordinary Courts of the land and as per Chandra Kumar”s case (supra) they are not on par with the High Courts' but serve a supplemental function to the High Courts. The Administrative Tribunals were conceived as and constitute an effective and real substitute for the High Courts' as regards Service matters and were supposed to serve as an alternative institutional mechanism to High Courts, they must, therefore, be able to inspire public confidence by providing themselves to be a competent and expert mechanism with a Judicial and objective approach. Thus, as Tribunals have come to stay and the basic premise of the establishment of Tribunals is sound, resolving the current issue will help in improving the Tribunal system in India, and hopefully, will make the process of litigation easier for those who wish to approach the Tribunals.
