Tribunal Reforms: Day 2 | Supreme Court seeks data on vacancies in tribunals, suggests circuit benches for Armed Forces Tribunal
Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021Judges: Surya Kant J, N.K. Singh J
On 6 January 2025, a Division Bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh continued hearing a batch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021. The petitions seek to address the issue of vacancies across tribunals. The bench directed the Union to submit details regarding vacancies across various tribunals in the country within six weeks. The Court also suggested setting up a circuit bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal apart from the existing regional benches. Specifically, it suggested setting up a circuit bench in Chandigarh. The AFT is a military tribunal, set up under the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. It adjudicates disputes and complaints regarding commission, appointment, enrolment or service conditions of army offices, members of reserve forces, air force officers, territorial army officers, and others subject to the Army Act, 1950.
Background
In July 2021, in a 2:1 split, the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 (the Ordinance).
The Ordinance inserted several provisions into the Finance Act, 2017 regarding service conditions for tribunal members. This included a minimum age for eligibility (50 years) and prescribed a four-year fixed tenure for the members and Chairperson of a tribunal. It also provided for a Search cum Selection Committee that would recommend two names for the appointment that would then be confirmed by the Union. These provisions were struck down.
The Bench declared that the Legislature had illegally overrode an earlier decision of the Court through this Ordinance. These conditions were also held to be violative of the independence of the judiciary.
In August 2021, Parliament passed the Tribunals Reforms Act which reproduced the same provisions that were struck from the Ordinance.
The Madras Bar Association filed a petition challenging the Act.
On 6 September 2021, the petition was heard by a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice N.V. Ramana and Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and L.Nageswara Rao. This was heard along with a series of petitions regarding vacancies in tribunals. On 6 January 2025, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh began hearing the matter.
Petitioners: High pendency in the Armed Forces Tribunal in Chandigarh and Himachal Pradesh
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, representing the petitioners focussed particularly on the high pendency of disputes in the Armed Forces Tribunals. While the principal bench of the AFT is based in Delhi, regional benches are present in Chandigarh, Lucknow, Kolkata, Guwahati, Chennai, Kochi, Mumbai, Jabalpur, Srinagar and Jaipur. Of these, Singh argued that the regional bench in Chandigarh was suffering from high pendency. Justice Kant noted that this was clearly because a high concentration of armed forces were from Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh. Singh pointed out that even disputes from Himachal Pradesh were being heard in Chandigarh and not Srinagar, the only other regional bench in that region.
Singh also pointed out that there were problems with appointments in AFT Chandigarh. He brought to notice that after the retirement of a member of the AFT Chandigarh, no new appointments had been made.
Attorney General R. Venkatramani stated that the chairperson of the AFT was already seized of the issue of appointments and that the selection process was going on throughout the year.
Justice Kant, then, suggested that an advance selection process, similar to the type adopted in the National Company Law Tribunal, could be adopted for AFT members.
Justice Kant: Can we have circuit benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal in Chandigarh?
Apart from appointments, Justice Kant also suggested that circuit benches of AFT’s regional benches could be created, similar to how Family Courts have circuit benches.
“Cost effectivity, access to justice, all these factors can be taken into account,” he noted, “For example, for Himachal matters, they can go to Shimla and Dharamshala, two places.” He also noted that if the AFT Srinagar has a circuit bench, litigants can also go to a circuit bench in Jammu.
Justice Kant stated that the basic infrastructure to do this was already present and that High Courts could assist in the setting up of these circuit benches. He pressed that this would significantly reduce the cost of litigation if more circuit benches were accessible.
“Because somebody who is retired, an army official, he is coming all the way to Chandigarh. That also can be avoided,” he noted.
Court: Union to give details on vacancies across various tribunals
Dictating the Order, Justice Kant directed the Union to submit information about different types of existing vacancies (including judicial members, technical members, and all others employed in the tribunals) across all tribunals, established under the Constitution, or statutes. Further, the Union must also submit details about the selection processes that are underway for appointments to these tribunals and the stage of their proceedings. Justice Kant stated that these details have to be submitted within six weeks.
Singh also requested the bench to consider passing an order, particularly regarding setting up a circuit bench in Chandigarh. So Chandigarh would have two tribunals, one the regional AFT, and another, a circuit bench of the Chandigarh AFT.
Justice Kant refused to pass an order on the matter but informed the Chandigarh AFT that it could consider setting up one more circuit bench in the city owing to the vast pendency of disputes.
He also suggested that judicial and administrative appointments to the Chandigarh circuit bench would not be a challenging task because “Chandigarh has its own attraction.” Therefore, former judges, whether from Chandigarh, Shimla or J&K High Courts, would not mind accepting the judicial membership there, Justice Kant stated. He also noted that administrative tribunal members who are part of the armed forces also prefer Chandigarh as a location.
The matter will be listed after six weeks.