Parliament passes the Tribunals Reforms Bill 2021; seeks to dissolve certain appellate tribunals

By - Divisha Srivastava*

The Rajya Sabha passed the Tribunals Reforms Bill 2021 on August 9, 2021, and the Bill contains certain provisions similar to that of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021, which was recently struck down by the Supreme Court in the Madras Bar Association case (2021). The Bill seeks to dissolve certain existing appellate bodies and transfer their functions (such as adjudication of appeals) to other existing judicial bodies (For more details click here).

The Supreme Court had struck down the clause in the Ordinance that fixed the tenure at 4 years by a 2:1 majority in the Madras Bar Association case (2021) on the grounds that it was contradictory to the directives in prior decisions that the term should be at least 5 years.

Also Read - Live-in-relationship cannot be at the cost of social fabric of this Country: Allahabad High Court.

In addition, the Apex Court (by a 2:1 majority) overturned the provisions of the Ordinance that provided a 50-year minimum age limit for appointment as members of Tribunals, which was contradictory to a previous ruling. The Court ruled that only advocates with at least ten years of experience should be considered for appointments to the Tribunals.

The Tribunals Reforms Bill, on the other hand, retains the 50-year-old minimum age limit, as stated in the proviso to Section 3. The Chairperson and members of the tribunal have the same four-year term limits. During the Rajya Sabha debate, some members pointed out that Bill's provisions were in violation of the Supreme Court’s decision.

Also Read - Preventive detention only to prevent public disorder; Cannot be invoked over apprehension of breach of law and order: Supreme Court.

In response to the criticism, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman stated that the house's rights cannot be limited and that the government respects the courts. Despite the opposition’s best efforts, a resolution to submit the bill to a select committee was defeated with 44 votes in favour of and 79 votes against the resolution. The bill was introduced in Lok Sabha on August 2, 2021, and was passed by the Lok Sabha on August 3, 2021.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE TRIBUNALS REFORMS BILL, 2021

*Divisha Srivastava is a 1st year student pursuing B.B.A.LL.B from S.N.D.T School of Law, Mumbai, Maharashtra.

Comments

Patna High Court Declares Bihar’s Reservation Amendments Ultra Vires

In a landmark decision, the Patna High Court has invalidated the Bihar government's legislative attempt to increase reservations for backward classes. The court's ruling focused on procedural flaws and the absence of a robust empirical basis for the hike, sparking a debate on judicial intervention in affirmative action policies. Background and Rationale Behind Setting Aside Bihar Reservation Increase Law The Bihar government had proposed an increase in reservations to address socio-economic disparities faced by backward classes. However, the court found that the state failed to follow due process, which includes conducting a thorough empirical study to justify the policy change. This procedural oversight led to the court's decision to strike down the increase. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a data-driven approach for policy changes related to reservations. The ruling underscored that without solid empirical evidence, such policies could not be justified within...

Pune Porsche Crash: Father of Minor Granted Bail

Image Credit: tv9marathi A Pune court has granted bail to the minor’s father, Vishal Agarwal, who faced charges under the Juvenile Justice Act for neglect and endangering the child by allowing him to drive without a license and consume alcohol. Additionally, bar owners and managers were arrested for serving alcohol to minors. The father, already in custody for other related charges, was implicated in the alleged manipulation of his son’s blood samples and in a separate case of kidnapping his driver. Advocate Prashant Patil argued that Vishal Agarwal's arrest was unlawful, contending that the charges were non-cognizable offenses and required a notice under the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Patil also highlighted contradictions in police reports, where the minor was listed as the accused in one FIR and as a victim in another. Also Read: Delhi High Court Stays Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Bail in Excise Policy Case Earlier Proceedings in the Pune Porsche Crash Inc...

Counsel's failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review: Bombay High Court

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has observed that “If Counsel has not urged a point, the fact that there were written submissions is immaterial if those written submissions were never in fact argued.” The Bench also added that “Counsel’s failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review or, I dare say, even appeal. It is no ground to assail any order of any judge of any court.” The bench was hearing a review petition filed for seeking reinstatement of original arbitration petition on grounds some of which were never argued and others never pleaded and the said petition was filed after the original arbitration petition was fully argued, and then decided by pronouncement in open court. Also Read - The Pension Scheme for freedom fighters cannot be construed in a manner that the requirements prescribed are rendered a dead letter: Bombay HC According to Justice GS Patel allowing parties to take grounds in review pleas or in appeals that were not argued initi...

Lawgic Simplified

Search This Blog