TYPES OF QUASI JUDICIAL BODIES AND

ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATORY BODIES IN

INDIA: AN OVERVIEW

PROJECT SUBMITTED TO

Dr. KAUMUDHI CHALLA

SUBJECT: Administrative law

PROJECT SUBMITTED BY

Saumya Raizada

ROLL NO. 140

SECTION C

SEMESTER VI

SUBMITTED ON February 15, 2017

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

RAIPUR, C.G.
 Declaration of Originality

I, Saumya Raizada, have undergone research of the project work titled “TYPES OF QUASI

JUDICIAL BODIES AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATORY BODIES IN INDIA:

AN OVERVIEW ”, as a student of Administrative law hereby declare that this Research

Project has been prepared by the student for academic purpose only, and is the outcome of
the investigation done by me and also prepared by myself under the supervision of Dr.
Kaumudhi Challa, faculty Jurisprudence, Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur. The
views expressed in the report are personal to the student and do not reflect the views of any
authority or any other person, and do not bind the statute in any manner.

I also declare that this Research Paper or any part thereof has not been or is not being
submitted elsewhere for the award of any degree or Diploma. This report is the intellectual
property of the University on the part of the student research work, and same or any part
thereof may not be used in any manner whatsoever in writing.

Saumya Raizada

i
 Certificate of Originality

This is to certify that Ms. Saumya Raizada , Roll Number – 140, student of Semester- VI of
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), Hidayatullah National Law University, New Raipur (Chhattisgarh) has
undergone research of the project work titled “TYPES OF QUASI JUDICIAL BODIES

AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATORY BODIES IN INDIA: AN OVERVIEW ”, in

partial fulfillment of the subject of Administrative Law. Her performance in research work is
upto the level.

Place: New Raipur ……………………………………

Dr. Kaumudhi Challa

(Faculty: Administrative Law)

Hidayatullah National Law University,

New Raipur, Chhattisgarh

ii
 Acknowledgement

At the outset, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude and thank my teacher, Dr.
Kaumudhi Challa for putting her trust in me and giving me a project topic such as this and for
having the faith in me to deliver. Ma’am, thank you for the opportunity that helped me learn
about an impotant area and aspect of Administrative Law and to help me grow. i will remain
indebted to you throughout my life for the knowledge imparted by you.

My gratitude also goes out to the staff and administration of HNLU for the infrastructure in
the form of our library that was a source of great help for the completion of this project.

SAUMYA RAIZADA

BA-LLB, SEMESTER VI

iii
 Table of Cases

 Bhagat Raja v. Union of India, AIR 1967 SC 1606 : (1967) 3 SCR 302

 Cf. Kaptan Singh v, UOI (1986) 4 SLR 545 (Del)

 Jaswant Sugar Mills v.Lakshmi Chand

 Patel Narshi Thakershi v. Pradyumansinghji Arjunsinghji (1971) 3 SCC

844.

 Sadiq Ali v. Election Commission, AIR 1972 SC 187

 Sampat Kumar, SP v. Union of India,(1987) 1 ATR 34

 UOI v. Deep Chand Pandey (1992) 4 SCC 432

 UOI v. K D Batish AIR 2006 SC 789

iv
 Contents
A. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………...1
B.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY……………………………………..........……………...2
(B.1) PROBLEM………………………………………………………................….............2
(B.2) RATIONALE……………………………………………………….................…........2
(B.3) OBJECTIVES…………………………………………………...............………........2
(B.4) HYPOTHESIS………………………………………………...............……………...2
(B.5) REVIEW OF LITERATURE......................................................................................3
(B.6) SOURCES OF STUDY ……………………………………............…….......….....4
(B.7) CHAPTERIZATION.................................................................................................4
(B.8)TIME SCHEDULE...................................................................................................4
(B.7) CONTRIBUTION TO RESEARCH…………..........…………..............................4
C.CHAPTER I: UNDERSTANDING ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION AND QUASI
JUDICIAL ACTION...........................................................……....…………......…….......5
CHAPTER II: GROWTH OF ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION AND QUASI JUDICIAL
BODIES…………………………………………………....……..........…….....................7
CHAPTERIII:CLASSIFICATION OF QUASI JUDICIAL
BODIES………………………………………....…..........................................................9
CHAPTER IV: CHALLENGES FACED BY QUASI JUDICIAL BODIES AND
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATOR BODIES...........................................................17
D.MAJOR FINDINGS..................................................................................................22
E.CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………....………..23
F.SUGGESTIONS.....................................................................................................24
G.BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………….….......25

v
A. INTRODUCTION:

Today, over and above ministerial functions, the executive perform many quasi-legislative
and quasi-judicial functions as well. Governmental functions have increased and even though
according to the traditional theory, the function of adjudication of disputes is the exclusive
jurisdiction of the ordinary courts of law, in reality, many judicial functions have come to be
performed by the executive, e.g. imposition of fine, levy of penalty, confiscation of goods,
etc.
The traditional theory of 'laissez faire' has been given up and the old ‘Police State’ has now
become a ‘Welfare State’, and because of this radical change in the philosophy as to the role
to be played by the State, its functions have increased. Today it exercises not only sovereign
functions, but, as a progressive democratic State, it also seeks to ensure social security and
social welfare for the common masses. It regulates the industrial relations, exercises control
over production, and starts many enterprises. The issues arising there from are not purely
legal issues. It is not possible for the ordinary courts of law to deal with all these socio-
economic problems.

For example, industrial disputes between the workers and the management must be settled as
early as possible. It is not only in the interest of the parties to the disputes, but of the society
at large. It is, however, not possible for an ordinary court of law to decide these disputes
expeditiously, as it has to function, restrained by certain innate limitations. All the same, it is
necessary that such disputes should not be determined in an arbitrary or autocratic manner.
Administrative tribunals are, therefore, established to decide various quasi-judicial issues in
place of ordinary courts of law.

1
B. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

The present study is a descriptive and analytical study based on critical review of both
primary and secondary sources. The Doctrinal method is used for the research on the project
work. Secondary and electronic resources have been largely used to gather information and
data about the topic. Books and other resources have been primarily helpful in giving this
project a firm structure. Websites, Dictionaries and articles have also been referred. Footnotes
have been provided wherever needed to acknowledge the source.

(B.1) PROBLEM:

The project research deals with Challenges that the various Administrative Adjudicatory
bodies face in today's times.

[B.2] RATIONALE:

The Rationale behind this Research is to study the various types of Administrative
Adjudicatory bodies that have mushroomed in India during the past few decades and analyze
their relevance in the present times, by providing suitable criticism.

(B.3) OBJECTIVES:

 Understanding Administrative Adjudication and Quasi Judicial action

 To discuss and analyze the Growth of Administrative adjudication and Quasi Judicial
bodies
 To identify and discuss in brief the Classification of quasi judicial bodies and its Types.
 To identify Challenges related to quasi judicial bodies and administrative adjudicator
bodies.
 To Provide for a suitable conclusion for the Project Report.

(B.4) HYPOTHESIS:

Today over and above ministerial functions , the executive performs many quasi-legislative
functions also. Governmental functions have increased and e en though according to the
traditional theory, the function of adjudication of disputes in the exclusive jurisdiction of

2
ordinary courts of law, in practice, many judicial functions have come to be performed by the
executive. But even this system of Dispute Resolution is clogged and a fresh look at the
system of tribunals in India is required so as to ensure speedy justice and quick disposal of
disputes arising out of administrative disputes which are essential for the development of the
nation and I shall seek to establish the same through my project report.

(B.5) SOURCES OF DATA:

This project is largely based on primary sources of data, however secondary and electronic
sources of data have been referred to a great extent. Books, case lawsare primarily helpful for
the completion of the project.

(B.6) REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

MC Jain Kagzi, The Indian Administrative Law ,6th Edn., Universal Law Publishing
Co. Pvt. Ltd.

The various Types and Categorization of Tribunals is the portion which has been referenced
from this book by MC Jain Kagzi which remains a very authentic book on the subject matter
of Administrative Law and deals with the subject matter of Administrative Law's origins and
the present status of the same.

C.K Takwani, Lectures on Administrative Law, 5th Edn., Eastern book Company

This book on Administrative Law in the most coherent and logical manner. The book
discusses all the major aspects of Administrative Law, like basic constitutional principles,
delegated legislation, natural justice, administrative tribunal, judicial review and their
application to the administrative machinery of India and the portion on Quasi-Judicial Bodies
and Administrative Adjudicatory bodies in Chapter 3 is inspired from the same.

C.K Thakker, Administrative Law, 2nd Edn., Eastern Book Company

A classic work regarded as on authority on the subject. The edition has been updated with
new materials. The doctrine of Judicial Review has been dealt with exhaustively in the book.
New doctrines, such as doctrines of estoppel, proportionality, legitimate expectation etc. have
been discussed. Judicial remedies such as prerogative remedies of writs, constitutional

3
remedies etc. have been highlighted. This book is noteworthy for its treatment of case law.
On each topic, all relevant decisions of Indian Courts have been discussed with the relevant
English and American decisions.
In my present research, the Report given by the Frank Committee on Tribunals and the
Limitations of Tribunals have been referenced from this work of C.K Thakker.

(B.7) CHAPTERISATION:

Chapter 1seeks to understand Administrative Adjudication and Quasi Judicial action. Chapter
2 discusses and analyzes the Growth of Administrative adjudication and Quasi Judicial
bodies and why did they come up. Chapter 3 seeks to identify and discuss The Classification
of Administrative Adjudicatory bodies; Their Types. Chapter 4 identifies the Challenges or
Limitations that are faced by these Quasi-Judicial Bodies.
(B.8)TIME SCHEDULE:
The time undertaken by the Researcher to complete the project report is 5 days.

(B.9)CONTRIBUTION OF RESEARCH:

This research seeks to bring clarity to the concept of Quasi Judicial Action and
Administrative Adjudication. Various Jurists like Bentham, Austin, Holland defined
Jurisprudence in their diverse perspectives. As a researcher I have tried to go through the
Development of Administrative Adjudication, Discuss various Types of Administrative
Adjudicatory bodies relevant in the present times. The researcher then has described the
various challenges related to such bodies and has tried to find a solution of the same.

4
 Chapter 1: Understanding Quasi Judicial Action
and Administrative Adjudication:
Today over and above ministerial functions , the executive performs many quasi-legislative
functions also. Governmental functions have increased and e en though according to the
traditional theory, the function of adjudication of disputes in the exclusive jurisdiction of
ordinary courts of law, in practice, many judicial functions have come to be performed by the
executive, e.g search and seizure, imposition of fine, levy of penalty, confiscation of goods,
etc1.

The term ‘administrative adjudication’ has been used synonymously with “administrative
justice”. In a socialist society, bulks of cases are not decided by the ordinary courts. When a
dispute arises between an administrative agency and a private person it is settled by the
administration, this is called administrative adjudication.

Jural postulates play a vital role in administrative adjudication. This is so because

administrative adjudication is based on the assumption that when liberty is substracted,
justice has to be added. It is necessary to make the people conscious of the view that
administrative powers will be exercised according to their notion of good behavior and good
administration. When the government is given more and more powers, public opinion
becomes more and more sensitive of the abuse and misuse of such powers. The judiciary
has established certain legal standards in this respect. It has its own weaknesses, but has
great strength as well.
Administrative adjudication has come into existence as a result of the philosophy of welfare
State and consequential socialization of law. Today the State exercises not only sovereign
functions, but as a progressive democratic State, it also seeks to ensure social security and
social welfare for the common masses. It regulates industrial relations, exercises control
over production and starts many enterprises. The issues arising there from are socio-
economic issues. It is not possible for the ordinary Courts of law to deal with all the issues
of socio-economic policies. As Wade and Philips rightly observe:

1
C.K Thakker, Administrative Law, 2nd Edn., Eastern Book Company, pg. 460

5
“Modern government gives rise to many disputes which cannot appropriately be solved by
applying objective legal principles or standards and depends ultimately on what is desirable
in the public interest as a matter of social policy.”2 For example industrial relations between
the workers and the management must be settled as soon as possible. It is not in the interest
of the parties to the disputes but of the society at large. It is not possible for the ordinary
Courts to decide these disputes expeditiously. At the same time, it is necessary that such
disputes should not be determined in arbitrary or autocratic manner. Administrative
Tribunals are, therefore, established to decide various quasi- judicial issues in place of
ordinary Courts of law. Tribunals are recognized even by the Constitution of India.

Administrative Tribunals have been established to decide various quasi-judicial issues in

place of ordinary courts of law. The adjudicatory and decisional power of the Government
and various administrative bodies relate the hearing of appeals, and revisions under the
Banking Companies Act, 1949, the Customs Act, 1962, the Mines Act, 1962, The Company
Act, 1956. An instance of adjudicatory function performed by a high functionary is the
Jurisdiction of the Election Commission to decide the disputed issues related to its wide
powers of control and conduct of elections to the House of parliament and the State
Legislatures; the Presidential and Vice Presidential Elections. For instance, under para 15 of
the Election Symbols Order, the Commission has the jurisdiction to decide the question
raised by two rival factions or groups of the recognized political party each of which claims
to be that party; and for this reason claims the exclusive right to use the symbol allotted to
such party. Such a question is not a dispute of civil nature relatable to Section 9 of the Civil
Code of Procedure3. Though par excellence, it is a political dispute, yet it must be decided on
adversary proceeding.4

Administrative Adjudication is also called as decision making action or Quasi-Judicial

Action. When an Administrative Body exercises Judicial powers then it is called a Quasi-
Judicial body.

In India, usually courts perform Judicial functions. But now due to various reasons such as
Paucity of time, being a welfare state more and more disputes have come up and there was a
need that the Administrative Authority itself started performing Judicial functions. It is also
in the interest of the parties that lesser time is taken through Administrative Adjudication

2 Constitutional Law, 1965, p. 699; See also the Reports of the Franks Committee 1957, pp. 8-9.
3
MC Jain Kagzi,6th Edn., Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., pg 337
4
Sadiq Ali v. Election Commission, AIR 1972 SC 187.
6
Chapter 2: Growth of Administrative Adjudication
and Quasi-Judicial Bodies
Though rapid growth of Administrative Tribunals is a special feature of the 20th cent., even in
the past, there were certain Tribunals. As observed by Wade5, the Commissioners of Customs
and Excise were given judicial powers before more than three and half centuries 6. A tax
Tribunal was established in the 18th cent. After the First and Second World War, several
Tribunals came to be created under various welfare beneficent legislations. Today
Administrative Tribunals hear and decide wide range of disputes between individuals and
individuals as also between the subjects and government7.

Regular courts of law perform judicial functions and dispense Justice according to the laws.
Nowadays they are finding it difficult to do the whole job. Nay, the fresh institutions and
delays of civil proceedings add to the increasing arrears. Often the Courts seem helpless in
the matter. The necessities of the Modern collectivist State with the aim of the creation of a
socialist society are multi-purpose. With the giving up of the philosophy of lasseiz faire the
State has ceased to be neutral, and has become active so as to effect every man in every
sphere.

The positive role of the state in the policy of trade control and industrial planning and the
measures of the state to give the advantage of health insurance, unemployment benefits, etc.,
create issues which are not purely legal, yet it is necessary that the administration should not
be arbitrary and autocratic, and that the fundamental democratic values and norms of the rule
of law must be preserved. It is necessary that an Industrial Dispute between the workers and
the management should be settled as early as possible for the advantage of the employees and
the employers, as well as the Industry. In such cases it is more prudent to leave such cases to
Administrative Adjudication than to the normal court procedure8.

A few of the reasons for the growth of these bodies can be summarized as:

I.As Courts are often constrained by technicalities/ Procedure, it is better to have Quasi-
Judicial or Administrative Bodies for dispute resolution instead.

5
Wade & Forsyth, Administrative Law (2009) 771.
6
12 Charles II, C.23, S. 31.
7
C.K Thakker, Administrative Law, 2nd Edn., Eastern Book Company, pg. 467.
8
MC Jain Kagzi,6th Edn., Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., pg 336.
7
II. Courts Overburdened: Mostly, Courts are overburdened with cases and thereby they do
not have the time to deal with the other disputes.

III. Quick Disposal Provided by the Administrative Adjudicatory Bodies: It is often seen
tat the Administrative Adjudicatory bodies provide with quicker disposal of cases than the
usual court hearings or court procedures.

IV. More Technical Knowledge and lesser prejudice against the Govt. in the case of
Administrative Adjudicatory bodies: Administrative Adjudicatory bodies have more
technical knowledge as compared to the normal courts and also have lesser prejudice against
govt. and henceforth are able to resolve disputes more efficiently.

V. Administrative authorities can take effective steps for enforcement of the aforesaid
preventive measures, e.g suspension, revocation or cancellation of licenses, destruction of
contaminated articles, etc., which are not generally available throughout the ordinary courts
of law.

VI. In Ordinary courts of law, the decisions are given after hearing the parties and on the
basis of the evidence on record. This procedure is not appropriate in deciding matters by the
administrative authorities where wide discretion may be given on the basis of the
departmental policy and other relevant factors9.

9
C.K Thakker, Administrative Law, 2nd Edn., Eastern Book Company, pg. 468.
8
 Chapter 3: Classification of Quasi Judicial Bodies

A. TRIBUNALS
The word ‘Tribunal’ is derived from the word ‘tribune’. Dictionary meaning of the word
‘tribune’ is a magistrate of Republican Period of Rome elected by the Roman Plebeians to
defend their right; a champion of popular rights; a name for a newspaper; a platform for
speaking from; a raised area for stand; bishop’s stall or throne. Tribunal judgment seat; Court
of justice of arbitration; a body appointed to adjudicate in some matters. In common parlance
dictionary meaning of the word ‘tribunal’ is ‘Court of justice’ or ‘seat of a Judge’10.

According to Servai, „the development of administrative law in a welfare state has made

administrative tribunals a necessity'.3 Administrative tribunals are authorities outside the

ordinary court system, which interpret and apply the laws when acts of public administration
are questioned in formal suits by the courts or by other established methods. They are not a
court nor are they an executive body. Rather they are a mixture of both. They are judicial in
the sense that the tribunals have to decide facts and apply them impartially, without
considering executive policy. They are administrative because the reasons for preferring them
to the ordinary courts of law are administrative reasons. The Supreme Court in Jaswant
Sugar Mills v.Lakshmi Chand laid down the following characteristics or tests to determine
whether an authority is a tribunal or not:

1. Power of adjudication must be derived from a statute or statutory rule.

2. It must possess the trappings of a court and thereby be vested with the power to
summon witnesses, administer oath, compel production of evidence, etc.

3. Tribunals are not bound by strict rules of evidence.

4. They are to exercise their functions objectively and judicially and to apply the law and
resolve disputes independently of executive policy.

5. Tribunals are supposed to be independent and immune from any administrative

interference in the discharge of their judicial functions.
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

10
www.assignmentpoint.com/arts/law/kinds-tribunals.html , Last accessed on 14 February, 2017, 1:54 AM.
9
In pursuance of Art 323-A Parliament has passed the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

covering all matters falling within the clause (1) of Article 323- A. This Act authorises
central government to establish administrative tribunals for central services and on the
application of States even for States services as well as for local bodies and other authorities
including public corporation. From the date of establishment of tribunals all courts except the
Supreme Court under Art 136 lose their jurisdiction with respect to the matter falling within
the jurisdiction of the tribunals.

A tribunal shall consist of Chairman and such number of Vice-Chairmen and other members
as appropriate Government may deem fit. They are appointed by the President in the case of
Central tribunals and by the President in consultation with the Governors or Governors in
case of State or joint Tribunals. The qualifications regarding that are laid down in the Act.
Tribunals are largely classified into two categories i.e. domestic tribunal and statutory
tribunal. This classification is based on the nature of the subject matter they adjudicate.

1) Domestic Tribunals.

2) Statutory Tribunals

Domestic Tribunals:
Domestic tribunal is a private body, not-statutory body set up by the agreement either express
or implied between the parties and designed as tribunal is really not a tribunal. It exercises
jurisdiction over the internal affairs and its decisions are subject to judicial control under the
doctrine of ultra vires. For examples- Tribunals of Bangladesh Bar Council, Bangladesh
Medical Association etc.

1. The domestic tribunal deals with the private matters rather than public matters.
2. The domestic tribunal does not follow procedures of the trial.
3. It deals with the internal affairs of a particular profession or association.
4. No court fee is required in domestic tribunal.

Statutory Tribunals:
10
Statutory tribunal is a statutory body. When any tribunals are created by the provisions of
statutes or under the authority of a statute they should strictly be called statutory tribunal. The
jurisdictions of the statutory tribunals are rest upon the statutes. For examples- Bangladesh
Labour Appellate Tribunal.

1. Statutory tribunals adjudicate matters of public concern.

2. It deals with the disputes between a govt. employee and the govt. in service matter.

Distinction between Domestic Tribunal and Statutory

Tribunal
The following distinguishing features between domestic tribunals and statutory tribunals
Should be kept in mind:
1. Whereas the jurisdiction of a domestic tribunal is founded on an agreement or
contract between its members, (express or implied) jurisdiction of a statutory tribunal
rests on the statute or rules framed there under.

2. In case of a domestic tribunal, even if the action is not lawful, normally, a writ
jurisdiction under Article 32 or 226 or supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227or under
Article 136 of the Constitution is not available though other remedies such as declaration,
injunction, damages, etc. can be sought in appropriate cases.

In case of statutory tribunal, however, the orders passed or actions taken are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court or High Courts under the Constitution of India.

3. It is open to a domestic tribunal to adopt its own procedure consistent with the
principles of natural justice and fair play. Statutory tribunal, on the other hand, derive
power and authority from a statute which creates it, and has to follow procedure laid down
in the Act under which it has been established.

TYPES OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

There are different types of administrative tribunals, which are governed by the statues, rules,
11
and regulations of the Central Government as well as State Governments.

Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)

The enactment of Administrative Tribunals Act in „1985 opened a new chapter in

administering justice to the aggrieved government servants. It owes its origin to Article 323
A of the Constitution which empowers the Central Government to set up by an Act of
Parliament, the Administrative Tribunals for adjudication of disputes and complains with
respective recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to the public services
and posts in connection with the Union and the States.

The Tribunals enjoy the powers of the High Court in respect of service matters of the
employees covered by the Act. They are not bound by the technicalities of the Code of Civil
Procedure, but have to abide by the Principles of Natural Justice. They are distinguished from
the ordinary courts with regard to their jurisdiction and procedures. This makes them free
from the shackles of the ordinary courts and enables them to provide speedy and inexpensive
justice.

The Act provides for the establishment of Central Administrative Tribunal and State
Administrative Tribunals. The CAT was established in 1985. The Tribunal consists of a
Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Members. These Members are drawn from the judicial as well
as the administrative streams. The appeal against the decisions of the CAT lies with the
Supreme Court of India.
Customs and Excise Revenue Appellate Tribunal (CERAT)
The Parliament passed the CERAT Act in 1986 The Tribunal adjudicate disputes,.
Complaints or offences with regard to customs and excise revenue. Appeals from the, orders
of the CERAT lies with the Supreme Court
Election Commission (EC)

The Election Commission is a tribunal for adjudication of matters pertaining to the allotment
of election symbols to parties and similar other problems. The decision of the commission
can be challenged in the Supreme Court.

Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board (FERAB)

The Board has been set up under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. A person who
is aggrieved by an order of adjudication for causing breach or committing offences under the

12
Act can file an appeal before the FERAB.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

This tribunal has been constituted under the Income Tax Act, 196 1. The Tribunal has its
benches in various cities and appeals can be filed before it by an aggrieved persons against
the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner or Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or
Director of 1 n c o m e ' ~ a x . An appeal against the order of the Tribunal lies to the High
Court. An appeal also lies to the Supreme Court if the High Court deems fit.

Railway Rates Tribunal

This-Tribunal was set up under the Indian Railways Act, 1989. It adjudicates matters
pertaining to the complaints against the railway administration. These may be related to the
discriminatory or unreasonable rates, unfair charges or preferential treatment meted out by
the railway 'administration. The appeal against the order of the Tribunal lies with the
Supreme Court.

Industrial Tribunal

This Tribunal has been set up under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It can be constituted
by' both the Central as well as State governments. The Tribunal looks into the dispute
between the employers and the workers in matters relating to wages, the period and mode of
payment, compensation and other allowances, hours of work, gratuity, retrenchment and
closure of the establishment. The appeals against the decision of the Tribunal lie with the
Supreme Court.

SOME FEATURES OF TRIBUNALS OF INDIA

Jurisdiction and Power:

1. After the coming into force of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 11, all judicial remedies
save those of the Supreme Court under Art 2 and 136 have been abolished and the pending
proceeding before other courts stand transferred before the regional Administrative Tribunals
under s.29 of the Act.

11
The Act was brought into force with effect from 2-10-1985. The Central Administrative Tribunals was set
up on 1-11-1985.

13
2. Administrative Tribunal is competent to exercise all powers which the respective courts
had, including declaration as to constitutionality of relevant laws. In short, the jurisdiction of
the Tribunal is not supplementary but is a complete substitute of the High Courts and Civil
Courts12
3. In view of s.14 of the Administrative Tribunal Act,1985, in case where the suit lay, the
employee will now have to seek his remedy by application under s.19 of the Act. Pending
suits shall stand transferred to the Administrative Tribunal having territorial jurisdiction
under section 29 of the Act13.

4. Section 29A (inserted in 1986) gives an appellant jurisdiction of the Central

Administrative Tribunal. Appeals from judgement of Civil Courts in suits relating to service
matter which are now governed by the A.T. Act shall lie to the Administrative Tribunals to
the exclusion of any other Civil Appellant Court or the High Court14. The central
Administrative Tribunal is the Tribunal constituted under Art.323-A of the Constitution and
is expected to have the same jurisdiction as that of High Court15

5. Orders of the Central Administrative Tribunals are nt open to challenge before the High
Court.

Sources of Tribunal’s Jurisdiction-

- Suit of proceeding transferred to it under s.29 of the Act

- S.19 deals with jurisdiction of entertaining original application relating to service
matters
- Appellant jurisdiction under s.29A

What the Administrative Tribunals can do-

1. Unconstitutionality of Law

(a) The tribunal can declare the unconstitutional a statute or subordinate legislation relating to
the dispute before it, which contravenes provisions of the constitution.

12
Sampat Kumar, SP v. Union of India,(1987) 1 ATR 34
13
Cf. Kaptan Singh v, UOI (1986) 4 SLR 545 (Del)
14
UOI v. Deep Chand Pandey (1992) 4 SCC 432
15
UOI v. K D Batish AIR 2006 SC 789

14
(b) Whether a body would be an „authority‟ within the meaning of Art.12.

(c) In a case where enquiry has been dispensed with under the 2nd proviso to Art 311(2), the
tribunal is competent to examine the legal jurisdiction for such dispensation.15

(d) It may decide question of law, including preliminary pleas in bar, e.g. limitation; non-
joinder of party; territorial jurisdiction of the tribunal; res judicata.

2. Procedure

(i) A Tribunal is not barred by the provisions of the Evidence Act.16 In order to discover the
truth, the Tribunal may resort to the inquisitional procedure, provided no principle of natural
justice is violated.

(ii) Tribunals shall be guided solely by the principles of natural justice unfettered by anything
in the CPC and shall have the power to regulate its own procedure.

(iii) A plea of violation of statutory provision can be taken before the Tribunal though not
taken in the petition.

(iv) It is competent to execute its own order, though the A.T Act has no specific provision in
this behalf.

3. Disciplinary matters:

The Tribunal is competent to go into the facts and set aside the order passed by a disciplinary
authority-

Where the conclusion arrived at is arbitrary or perverse.

On the other hand , the Tribunal will not interfere –

i. with the finding of facts of the enquiry officers where there was some evidence before him
on the basis of which he could reasonably come to the conclusion that the charges against the
petitioner were proved .

ii. with an order of rejection, by the Tribunal , of an application for reinstatement on the
grounds of inordinate and unexplained delay.
iii. There has been some difference of opinion amongst the tribunals as to how far, if at all,
they may interfere with the punishment awarded by a disciplinary authority
Likewise, Administrative Tribunals can perform other functions of Punishment,
15
Compulsory retirement, Interlocutory matters etc.

What the Administrative Tribunals cannot do-

However wide be the jurisdiction of the tribunal, it cannot exercise any jurisdiction of power
which no court could exercise, e.g.,-

(a) To question the ground of satisfaction of the President under Cl. (c) of the second proviso
to Art.311 (2)

(b) To go into the merits of an administrative determination in the absence of mala fides,
arbitrariness, colourable exercise of power or exercise of power without jurisdiction; or a
finding without any evidence at all.

(c) To overrule or by-pass decision of the High Court which are binding on it as precedents.

(d) Though, like the High Court or a Civil Court, an administrative Tribunal has jurisdiction
to make interim order in like circumstances.
B. COMMISSION
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (NCDRC),

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), India is a quasi-judicial

commission in India which was set up in 1988 under the Consumer Protection Act of 1986.
Its head office is in New Delhi. The commission is headed by a sitting or retired judge of the
Supreme Court of India. The commission is presently headed by Justice D K Jain, former
judge of the Supreme Court of India.
Section 21 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 posits that the National Consumer shall have
jurisdiction:- to entertain a complaint valued more than one crore and also have Appellate
and Revisional jurisdiction from the orders of State Commissions or the District fora as the
case may be.
Section 23 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, provides that any person aggrieved by an
order of NCDRC, may prefer an Appeal against such order to Supreme Court of India within
a period of 30 days16.
NHRC: The Rights Commission (NHRC) of India is an autonomous public body
constituted on 12 October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Ordinance of 28
September 1993. It was given a statutory basis by the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993

16
ncdrc.nic.in, Last Accessed on 14 February, 2017 at 2:15 AM.
16
(TPHRA).] The NHRC is the National Human Rights Commission of India, responsible
for the protection and promotion of human rights, defined by the Act as "rights relating to
life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or
embodied in the International Covenants".

"Human Rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the
individual guaranteed by the constitution or embodied in the International covenants and
enforceable by courts in India. "Commission" means the National Human Rights
Commission constituted under section of All human beings are born free and equal in dignity
and rights known as Human rights, as commonly understood, are the rights that every human
being is entitled to enjoy freely irrespective of his religion, race, caste, sex and nationality,
etc. In Declaration of Independence acknowledged the fundamental human rights. Human
right means different thing to different people. Human Rights are not static. New rights are
recognized and enforced from time to time. Only persons fully conversant with the latest
development about the expanding horizons of Human Rights can promote their awareness
better than others.

C. LOKPAL
It is an anti-corruption authority or ombudsman who represents the public interest. The
concept of an ombudsman is borrowed from Sweden. The Lokpal has jurisdiction over all
Members of Parliament and central government employees in cases of corruption. The
Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act was passed in 2013 with amendments in parliament, following
the Jan Lokpal movement led by Anna Hazare. The Lokpal is responsible for enquiring into
corruption charges at the national level while the Lokayukta performs the same function at
the state level.

The Lokpal Bill provides for the filing, with the ombudsman, of complaints of corruption
against the prime minister, other ministers, and MPs. The Administrative Reforms
Commission (ARC) recommended the enacting of the Office of a Lokpal, convinced that
such an institution was justified, not only for removing the sense of injustice from the minds
of citizens, but also to instill public confidence in the efficiency of the administrative
machinery17.

17
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lokpal,Last Accessed on February 14, 2017 at 2:29 AM.
17
 Chapter 4: Limitations of Quasi Judicial and
Administrative Adjudicatory Bodies
No doubt, there are certain advantages of administrative adjudication, but it has its own
limitations also.
It is against the theory of rule of law propounded by Dicey. According to him, judicial
powers of the State should remain only with Crown's Courts and should not be transferred to
any other organ.

It is not correct to say that Administrative Tribunals dispose of cases expeditiously and
without delay. Experience has shown that even these tribunals take years to decide disputes
which come before them for adjudication.18 This position prevails almost in all tribunals,
such as Service Tribunals, Tax Tribunals, Labour and Industrial Tribunals, Claims Tribunals
etc. though administrative adjudication is essential and useful in modem day administration,
we should not be blind to the defects from which it suffers or the dangers it poses to a
democratic polity. Some of the main drawbacks are mentioned below.

(i) Administrative adjudication is a negation of Rule of Law. Rule of Law ensures

equality before law for everybody and the supremacy of ordinary law and due
procedure of law over governmental arbitrariness. But administrative tribunals,
with their separate laws and procedures often made by themselves, puts a serious
limitation upon the celebrated principles of Rule of Law.
(ii) Administrative tribunals have in most cases; no set procedures and sometimes
they violate even the principles of natural justice.
(iii) Administrative tribunals often hold summary trials and they do not follow any
precedents. As such it is not possible to predict the course of future decisions.
(iv) The civil and criminal courts have a uniform pattern of administering justice and
centuries of experience in the administration of civil and criminal laws have
borne testimony to the advantages of uniform procedure. A uniform code of
procedure in administrative adjudication is not there.
(v) Administrative tribunals are manned by administrators and technical heads who
may not have the background of law or training of judicial work. Some of them
may not possess the independent outlook of a judge.

18
Patel Narshi Thakershi v. Pradyumansinghji Arjunsinghji (1971) 3 SCC 844.
18
The Swaran Singh Committee has very commendably completed its

recommendatory exercises in the restructurization of the Constitution. Though the Committee

covered a wide spectrum from the Preamble to Article 368 but for our limited purpose
attention is focussed on those recommendations only of the Committee which relate to
administrative justice.

The Committee recommends:

1. Administrative tribunals may be set up both at the State level and at the Centre to decide
cases relating to service matters. These tribunals shall be constituted under a Central law.

2. Provision may be made for setting up an All-India Labour Appellate Tribunal to decide
appeals from Labour Courts and Industrial Courts.

3. Disputes relating to the following matters shall be decided by tribunals:

(i) Any matter concerning revenue or concerning any act ordered or done in the collection
thereof.

(ii) Any matter relating to land reforms, ceiling on urban property and procurement and
distribution of food grains and other essential commodities.

In regard to the matters specified above the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under
Article 32 and of the High Court under Article 226 shall be excluded. The relevant statutes
governing these matters will also make specific provisions excluding the jurisdiction of
courts over such matters. However the right to apply for special leave of the Supreme Court
under Article 136 shall remain.

4. No writ shall lie in relation to election matters.

5. Reference to tribunals in Article 227 should be omitted.

6. The words 'and for any other purpose' may be deleted from Article 226.

Another problem of administrative adjudication is that apart from the statute there is no
obligation on administrative agencies exercising decision-making powers to give reasons for
their decisions. It is admitted on all hands that in order to avoid arbitrariness, to facilitate

19
review and to develop uniform principles of administrative law, 'reasons' are essential. It is
gratifying that the Supreme Court has insisted that the administrative agencies exercising
adjudicatory powers must give reasons though the question of sufficiency of reasons in a
particular case remains still uncertain.19 If the courts of law are to be replaced by
administrative authorities and tribunals as indeed, in some kinds of cases, with the
proliferation of administrative laws, they may have to be so replaced, it is essential that
administrative authorities and tribunals should accord fair and proper hearing and give
sufficiently clear and explicit reasons in support of their orders. Then alone administrative
authorities and tribunals exercising quasi-judicial functions will be able to justify their
existence and carry credibility with the people by inspiring confidence in the administrative
adjudicatory process. It is true that all the persons manning administrative agencies
exercising adjudicatory powers are not judges, and therefore, are not expected to write
lengthy judgments. However, it may be suggested that they must be brought under some legal
obligation to include a statement of findings and conclusions as well as the reasons or basis
thereof upon all material issues of fact, law and discretion presented on record whenever any
party demands it. Administrative agencies exercising adjudicatory powers must also reinforce
their findings with 'substantial evidences'. Substantial evidences here mean such relevant
evidences as a reasonable man might accept as adequate to support the conclusion. The 'no
evidence rule' presently followed is not only illusory but also unjust.

Leaving aside tribunals, administrative agencies exercising adjudicatory powers discharge

various other administrative and governmental functions. In many cases these agencies
combine the functions of prosecutor and judge in one. In the interest of justice and for
regaining the lost faith of the people in administrative justice some sort of separation of
functions is necessary. Therefore, the institution of 'Hearing Officers' of U.S.A. or the
institution of 'Inspectors' of England is worth considering. This may also help eliminate
problems like 'departmental bias', 'plea bargaining', 'official perspective' and 'political
interference' which are eating into the very marrow of the administrative justice.

Unforeseeability and unpredictability of decisions of administrative agencies exercising

adjudicatory powers is another reason why these agencies do not carry credibility with the
people. These agencies do not publish their decisions in the form of official reports and
thereby their actions go beyond the pale of public criticism. This element of secrecy not only

19
Bhagat Raja v. Union of India, AIR 1967 SC 1606 : (1967) 3 SCR 302
20
creates suspicion but the agencies are deprived of the benefit which healthy public criticism
can confer. Administrative agencies also do not follow the theory of precedents, and
therefore, their decisions become unpredictable. This not only offends the common man's
sense of justice but is also against the concept of rule of law. No doubt individualization of
justice demands freedom from precedents, yet these agencies must be very slow in overruling
their own decisions. This will help in developing some sound principles of administrative law
which are significantly lacking in India.

If substantive law is important, the procedural law cannot be in any way less significant,
because unless the media is certain and trustworthy justice cannot be up to the mark and may
result in arbitrary actions. Therefore, it may be suggested that the Central Government must
appoint a Task Force Committee to go into various problems of administrative justice with
special reference to its procedure and to draft a minimum procedure on the pattern of
Administrative Procedure Code, 1946 and the Tribunals and Enquiries Act, 1958, laying
down the minimum procedure which all the administrative agencies exercising adjudicatory
powers must follow.

It has been commented, " Tribunals are becoming more formal, expensive and procedurally
complex20." Many complaints had been made by people against the working of
Administrative Tribunals to the Franks Committee.21

(1) Sometimes, there is no appeal against the Tribunal's decision, e.g. Rent Tribunal.
Tremendous power, which can ruin a person's life, has been put into the hands of the three
men. Yet there is no higher court on which their decisions can be tested.
(2) the Three on the Bench of the Tribunal need have no proper legal qualifications. A court
of no appeal has been put into the hands of men who are generally neither qualified lawyers,
magistrates nor judges.
(3) There is no evidence on oath, and therefore there can be no proper cross-examination as
in a court of law. Statements are made on both sides, but the time-honoured method of
getting to the truth cannot be used.
(4) Procedure is as the tribunal shall determine, No rules have been laid down as to the
procedure at a tribunal hearing. Witnessess may be heard or not heard at their pleasure.

20
C.K Thakker, Administrative Law, 2nd Edn., Eastern Book Company, pg.524.
21
Wade & Forsyth, Administrative Law (2000) 773-774.
21
MAJOR FINDINGS

 In practice there are a number of tribunals functioning in the country. Very few of them,
however, have been able to inspire confidence in the public.
 The tribunals have shown a singular lack of competence and objectivity in determining
disputes.
 Another reason for their failure is the constitution of the tribunals and the method of
appointment of the personnel. Persons with expertise and the right qualifications do not
want to sit on these tribunals thus leading to the unsatisfactory functioning of these
tribunals.
 The uncertainty of tenure, unsatisfactory service conditions, interference by the
executive and political interference have further impeded the proper development of
tribunals in India.
 Tribunals are supposed to provide specialised adjudicatory services but the type of
people appointed lack the requisite expertise and are on the tribunals merely because of
political pressure and executive interference.

22
CONCLUDING REMARKS:

Tribunals are supposed to serve as alternative institutional mechanisms to high courts, they must
therefore be able to inspire public confidence by proving themselves to be a competent and
expert mechanism with a judicial and objective approach. In order to achieve this it is essential
that members of the tribunal are equipped with adequate judicial acumen and expertise. These
judicial officers need to be balanced with experts in the particular field. Only a judicious blend of
the two will be able to provide an effective and result oriented tribunal system. Another
important measure which needs to be taken are steps to maintain the independence of the
members of these tribunals from political or executive interference. Just as the ordinary judiciary
are protected from political control through security of tenure and through institutionalized
methods of appointment (through a selection committee comprising of the Chief Justice,
Departmental secretaries, etc.) in order to further reduce the burden on the high courts the high
courts must be divested of the supervisory jurisdiction over the tribunals. It is essential therefore
that a single centralised nodal agency be established to oversee the functioning of the tribunals.
Such a centralised umbrella organisation will ensure the independence of the tribunals in matters
of tenure and funds.

Thus the overall picture regarding tribunalisation of justice in the country is far from
satisfactory. A fresh look at the system of tribunals in India is required so as to ensure speedy
justice and quick disposal of disputes arising out of administrative disputes which are essential
for the development of the nation.

23
SUGGESTIONS:
 More number of functioning tribunals functioning in the country is very important.
 The ones working should work without corruption and also such that they inspire
confidence in the public.
 The tribunals should, as far as possible try to show a competence and objectivity in
determining disputes.
 Another reason for their failure is the constitution of the tribunals and the method of
appointment of the personnel. Persons with expertise and the right qualifications do not
want to sit on these tribunals thus leading to the unsatisfactory functioning of these
tribunal, henceforth efforts must be made so that only the chosen experts be able to get
elected in such positions of confidence and power.
 The uncertainty of tenure, unsatisfactory service conditions, interference by the
executive and political interference have further impeded the proper development of
tribunals in India and the same should be looked into carefully and timely.
 Tribunals are supposed to provide specialized adjudicatory services but the type of
people appointed lack the requisite expertise and are on the tribunals merely because of
political pressure and executive interference. Provisions may be made for the avoidance
of political pressure and executive interference for a smoother functioning of the
Administrative Adjudicatory bodies in India.

24
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
 MC Jain Kagzi,6th Edn., Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
 C.K Takwani, Lectures on Administrative Law, 5th Edn., Eastern book Company

 C.K Thakker, Administrative Law, 2nd Edn., Eastern Book Company

 Wade & Forsyth, Administrative Law, 4th Edn.

OTHER REFERENCES:

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lokpal

ncdrc.nic.in

www.assignmentpoint.com/arts/law/kinds-tribunals.html

25