ADMINISTRATIVE

ADJUDICATION
INTRODUCTION

 Increase in complexities- quasi-legislative and quasi-

judicial functions.
 Police state to welfare state
 Complex conflicts –need high degree of specialised
understanding
 Increase in number of cases
 Inability of court to deal with cases
CONTINUED..
 Administrative Adjudication brides gap
 Defined as “Judgement meat, court of justice, board or
committee to adjudicate claims of a particular kind
 Tribunals since independence, railway rates tribunal,
income tax appellate tribunal, labour tribunal etc.
 In 1976: 42nd constitutional amendment; Article 323 A and
323 B- establish administrative and other tribunals
 Administrative Tribunals Act: 1985

 Dicey’s opposition
REASONS FOR GROWTH

 Increased governmental functions

 Knowledge in particular subject
 Preventive measures
 Enforcement of preventive measures
 Technical nature of disputes.
 Cost
 Flexible
CONSTITUTIONAL STAND

 Article 136
 Article 227
 Constitution 42nd Amendment : restricted, limited, curtailed
and even totally excluded power of judicial review of High
Courts and Supreme Courts
 Constitution 44th Amendment 1978
 Administrative Tribunals Act 1985
TRIBUNALS, COURTS, AND THE
EXECUTIVE
 Legislature enacts a law
 Executive implements it and maintains law & order
 Judiciary interprets and declares what is law
 Powers are given to the Executive Authority for
adjudication creating Administrative Tribunals
performing Quasi-Judicial functions
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AND
COURT
 Administrative Tribunals are combination of the ‘Executive’
as well as ‘Judiciary’ carrying out ‘quasi-judicial functions’.
 Courts fall in the ambit of Judiciary with principle objective
of ensuring justice and carrying out the ‘judicial functions’.
 All courts are tribunals but all tribunals are not courts.
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AND
EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY

 Administrative tribunals are bound to act judicially in

accordance with the rules of natural justice.
 Executive authorities perform Administrative functions
and give decisions purely based on the administrative
policies.
 Administrative tribunals are not executive bodies.
QUASI-JUDICIAL, ADMINISTRATIVE AND
JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS

 Administrative tribunals are adjudicating bodies

deciding disputes by exercising judicial powers which
are distinguished from executive functions.
 These functions are quasi-judicial because they are
administrative functions at par with judicial functions
made according the law and not just policies.
 A.K Kraipak v. Union of India AIR 1970 SC 150
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

 The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 Central Administrative Tribunal, Industrial Tribunals,
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Election Commission
(EC), Bar Council, etc.
 Provides specialization & expert knowledge in non-
arbitrary manner with comparatively cheap and speedy
trial
FUNCTIONING OF TRIBUNALS

 Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down in

the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
 Guided by the principles of natural justice and subject to
the other provisions of the Act and of any rules made by
the Central Government.
 Union of India v. T.R. Verma, AIR 1957 SC 882 at 885
PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE

 Principlesof natural justice are firmly grounded in Article

14 and 21 of the Constitution.
 Mainly there are two principles:

1. Nemo in propria causa judex, esse debet

2. Audi alteram partem
AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM: THE RULE OF FAIR
HEARING
 Right To Notice
 Right To Know The Evidence Against Him
 Right To Present Case And Evidence
 Rule Against Dictation
 Financial Capacity To Attend The Enquiry
 Decision Post-Haste
 Should The Third Party To Dispute Be Heard
SUPERINTENDENCE OF SUPREME COURT
AND HIGH COURT

 Article 141 of the Indian Constitution declares that the law

declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all court within
the territory of India.
 High Court, over and above writ jurisdiction has also supervisory
jurisdiction over all subordinate courts and inferior tribunals
within the territories in relation to which it exercise its jurisdiction.
LIMITATIONS AND DRAWBACKS

 Administrative adjudication is a negation of Rule of Law.

 Administrative tribunals violate the principles of natural justice.
 Tribunals do not follow any precedents.
 Administrative tribunals are manned by administrators and
technical heads who may not have the background of law
CONCLUSION

 The changes in the tribunal system have been visible

 The Tribunal system continues facing a lot of issues.
 The issues surrounding tribunalisation may be addressed
by setting up of a body which supervises the working of
tribunals