Tribunals in India

The Indian judiciary has long faced the challenge of an overburdened court system. With the increasing number of cases, delays in delivering justice have become a serious concern. To address this issue, the Indian Constitution was amended in 1976 to introduce tribunals—specialised quasi-judicial bodies designed to expedite dispute resolution in specific fields.

Tribunals help reduce the load on traditional courts by handling particular categories of cases, especially related to administrative service matters, taxation, labour disputes, environmental issues, and more. This article discusses the constitutional basis, types, powers, and functioning of tribunals in India, along with relevant judicial pronouncements and the challenges they face today.

Constitutional Basis of Tribunals

Tribunals were not part of the original Indian Constitution. Their introduction came with the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, which inserted Part XIV-A, containing Articles 323A and 323B. These provisions empower Parliament and state legislatures to establish tribunals for adjudicating specific disputes.

• Article 323A deals specifically with Administrative Tribunals, primarily for the adjudication of service-related disputes involving government employees. It allows Parliament to establish a central tribunal and separate tribunals for states or groups of states. This article also provides for the tribunal’s powers, jurisdiction, and procedure, including the power to punish for contempt.
• Article 323B empowers both Parliament and state legislatures to set up tribunals for other specified matters such as taxation, foreign exchange, industrial and labour disputes, land reforms, elections, rent and tenancy issues, and control of essential goods.

Both articles contain an override clause which ensures that the laws establishing tribunals prevail over any conflicting provisions in the Constitution or other laws.

What is a Tribunal?

A tribunal is a quasi-judicial body that adjudicates disputes in a specialised field. Unlike regular courts, tribunals are created by statute and only possess the powers explicitly granted to them.

The Supreme Court, in several judgements, has laid down the essential features of tribunals:

• They must have the ‘trappings of a court’, which means they should be able to hold hearings, record evidence, and pass reasoned orders.
• They should be constituted by the State under statutory authority.
• They must be vested with judicial power of the State to decide questions of law or fact affecting citizens’ rights.

Tribunals sit somewhere between traditional courts and administrative bodies, focusing on specialised subject matters and offering expert adjudication.

Difference Between Tribunals and Courts

Though tribunals and courts both deal with legal disputes, there are important differences between Tribunals and Courts.

Tribunals provide expertise and faster resolution but lack the full independence and procedural rigour of courts.

Major Types of Tribunals in India

India has several tribunals functioning in different domains, mainly under the framework established by Articles 323A and 323B:

Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)

Established in 1985 under the Administrative Tribunals Act, CAT handles service disputes of central government employees. It has multiple benches across the country, many aligned with High Courts. Appeals against CAT decisions lie before the respective High Court.

State Administrative Tribunals

Set up on the request of states to adjudicate state government employees’ service matters. Their structure varies from state to state.

Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT)

Created by the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, it deals with disputes related to commissions, appointments, enrolments, and service conditions of armed forces personnel. It has a principal bench in Delhi and regional benches in major cities.

National Green Tribunal (NGT)

Established in 2010, the NGT addresses environmental protection, conservation of forests, and natural resource-related disputes. It aims to dispose of cases within six months, combining judicial and technical expertise.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)

Formed under the Income Tax Act, 1961, ITAT handles appeals against income tax assessments. It comprises judicial and accountant members.

Other Tribunals

These include Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT), Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), and Water Disputes Tribunals.

Powers and Procedures of Tribunals

Tribunals generally enjoy the powers of a civil court for effective functioning. These powers include:

• Summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses.
• Examining witnesses under oath.
• Requiring the discovery and production of documents.
• Receiving evidence on affidavits.
• Issuing commissions to examine witnesses or documents.
• Reviewing and setting aside ex parte orders.
• Punishing for contempt where allowed by statute.

While tribunals are not bound by the strict rules of evidence and procedure applicable to courts, they must adhere to the principles of natural justice — including the right to a fair hearing and unbiased decision-making.

Members of tribunals enjoy immunity for acts done in good faith during their official duties. Tribunal proceedings are treated as judicial proceedings under Indian Penal Code provisions relating to offences like giving false evidence.

Judicial Review and Important Judgements

The Supreme Court has clarified the role of tribunals in the judicial system through various judgements:

• L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997): The Court held that decisions of administrative tribunals are subject to judicial review by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227. However, tribunals cannot question the constitutional validity of the parent Act under which they are constituted.
• Union of India v. Delhi High Court Bar Association (2002): Emphasised tribunals as a “cheap and fast-track” alternative to courts, free from rigid procedural formalities.
• Minerva Mills (1980) and S.P. Sampath Kumar (1987): Clarified that tribunals cannot oust the power of judicial review exercised by High Courts entirely.

These rulings affirm that tribunals are an important part of the justice delivery mechanism but remain subject to constitutional safeguards.

Challenges Faced by Tribunals

Despite their advantages, tribunals face several challenges:

• Lack of Uniformity: There is no standardisation in the appointment processes, qualifications, service conditions, and procedures across various tribunals.
• Executive Control: Since members’ tenure and service conditions are often controlled by the executive, concerns about judicial independence arise.
• Resource Constraints: Many tribunals suffer from inadequate infrastructure, insufficient staff, and delayed appointments.
• Judicial Confidence and Public Perception: Variable quality of decisions and administrative interference have sometimes impacted public trust and the willingness of competent professionals to join tribunals.
• Appeal Mechanisms: Inconsistencies exist regarding appellate routes, with some tribunals’ decisions being final while others allow appeals only on points of law.

Conclusion

Tribunals have emerged as a vital mechanism to deliver speedy and expert justice in India. By specialising in particular domains and following simplified procedures, they ease the burden on courts and reduce delays. However, the lack of uniformity, executive influence, and resource shortages remain hurdles.

With well-designed reforms—such as a uniform statute, improved independence, and adequate resources—tribunals can fulfil their promise as efficient adjudicatory bodies. A robust and transparent tribunal system will strengthen India’s justice delivery, contributing positively to the rule of law and public confidence.