Beyond Pendency: Rebuilding India’s Tribunal and Judicial Architecture

Context

The Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026 was passed by the Lok Sabha to overhaul the governance of India''s quasi-judicial ecosystem. It repeals the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 (parts of which were struck down by the Supreme Court) and establishes a statutory, judiciary-led National Tribunals Commission (NTC) to bring 16 major tribunals under a uniform administrative and selection mechanism.

Constitutional Framework & Core Differences

• 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976: Inserted Part XIV-A into the Constitution:
• Article 323A: Empowers Parliament alone to establish Administrative Tribunals for public service and recruitment disputes (Union, States, local authorities).
• Article 323B: Empowers both Parliament and State Legislatures (within their legislative competence) to set up tribunals for specific subject areas (e.g., taxation, foreign exchange, labour disputes, land reforms, urban property ceilings).

Evolution of Tribunal Jurisprudence (Supreme Court)

Over nearly four decades, the Supreme Court has set binding safeguards to protect tribunal independence:

• S.P. Sampath Kumar Case (1987): Tribunals must be effective alternatives to High Courts, requiring institutional independence from sponsoring ministries.
• L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997): Struck down provisions that excluded High Court oversight. Held that judicial review under Articles 226/227 (High Courts) and Article 32 (Supreme Court) is an unalterable part of the Basic Structure. Tribunals act as courts of first instance, but their decisions remain subject to writ jurisdiction of division benches of High Courts.
• Rojer Mathew (2019) & Madras Bar Association Rulings (2020, 2021, 2025): Struck down executive-dominated selection committees and short tenures (e.g., 4-year limits). Mandated a minimum 5-year tenure to preserve institutional memory and judicial independence. Struck down arbitrary minimum age thresholds (e.g., 50-year entry rule for advocates). Repeatedly directed the Union government to set up an independent National Tribunals Commission (NTC).

Key Provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026

National Tribunals Commission (NTC):

• Composition: 5 members—Head/Chairperson (former Supreme Court Judge or former High Court Chief Justice), 2 Judicial Members (former HC judges/CJs), and 2 Technical Members (≥25 years experience in public administration, finance, law, etc.).
• Role: Conducts selection, monitors performance, oversees disciplinary complaints, and manages the National Tribunals Data Grid.

Search-cum-Selection Committees:

• Recommends appointments with a mandatory single name plus a waiting-list candidate. Government must process and notify appointments within 3 months.

Tenure and Age Limits:

• Chairpersons: 5-year tenure or up to 70 years of age.
• Members: 5-year tenure or up to 67 years of age.

Broader Context: All India Judicial Service (AIJS)

• To tackle severe pendency (over 5 crore cases across Indian courts) and high judicial vacancy rates (33% in High Courts, 21% in Subordinate Judiciary):
• Constitutional Mechanism (Article 312): Parliament can create an AIJS common to the Union and States if the Rajya Sabha passes a resolution supported by at least two-thirds of members present and voting in the national interest.
• Scope Restriction (Article 312(2)): AIJS can only recruit at the level of District Judges (as defined under Article 236) and cannot include posts inferior to a district judge.

Mains Practice Questions

 Critically examine the constitutional and federal challenges associated with the creation of the All India Judicial Service (AIJS) under Article 312. (10 Marks, 150 Words)