Administrative Tribunals

Introduction

In Administrative law, the term ‘tribunal’ is used in a significant sense and refers to only the
adjudicatory bodies which lie outside the sphere of the ordinary judicial system. Technically
in India, the judicial powers are vested in the Courts which aims to safeguard the rights of the
individuals and promotes justice. Therefore, to institute an effective system of the judiciary
with fewer complexities, the judicial powers are delegated to the administrative authorities,
thus, giving rise to administrative tribunals or administrative adjudicatory bodies which holds
quasi-judicial features.

The Indian state operates through the legislature, executive, and judiciary. The legislature
formulates laws, while the executive implements them. The judiciary examines disputes to
protect citizens' rights. The Indian Constitution guarantees constitutional remedies through
adjudication or dispute settlement machinery. This machinery includes judicial authorities,
quasi-judicial bodies, courts, and tribunals. Administrative tribunals are established in India
to investigate various activities like trade, industry, taxation, and service matters. These
tribunals are designed to address grievances and complaints of government personnel,
ensuring objectivity and fair play. The administrative tribunals are responsible for
adjudicating service disputes of public service personnel.

Evolution of Administrative tribunal

The First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966-70) recommended the setting up of

Civil Service Tribunals to function as the final appellate authority in respect of government
orders inflicting major penalties of dismissal, removal from service, and reduction in rank. A
Committee under the chairmanship of J.C. Shah had recommended that an independent
tribunal should be set up to exclusively deal with service matters. The Supreme Court in
1980 observed that public servants should not be forced to dissipate their time and
energy in court-room battles and suggested that public servants might approach fact-
finding administrative tribunals.

The Constitution of India was amended to enable the setting up of Civil Service Tribunals
through 1976, 42nd amendment Article 323-A. The Administrative Tribunals Act 1985
came into force in July 1985, allowing the Parliament to provide for adjudication or trial by
administrative tribunals of disputes and complaints concerning recruitment and conditions of
service of persons appointed to public service and posts in connection with the affairs of the
union, state, local, or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the
government or any corporation owned or controlled by the government.

The Administrative Tribunals Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha on 29th January 1985 and
received the assent of the President of India on 27th February 1985. The Supreme Court
judgment dated 18 March 1997 states that appeals against the orders of an
administrative tribunal shall lie before the Division Bench of the concerned High Court.
The objective of the tribunal is to provide speedy and inexpensive justice to litigants.
Need for Tribunals

 Established to reduce court workload and expedite decisions.

• Provide a forum staffed by lawyers and experts in their jurisdiction.
• Play a crucial role in justice mechanism, taking pressure off overburdened courts.
• Hear disputes related to environment, armed forces, tax, and administrative issues.

Administrative Tribunals
o Administrative Tribunals was set-up by an act of Parliament, Administrative
Tribunals Act, 1985. It owes its origin to Article 323 A of the Constitution.
 It adjudicates disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and conditions
of service of persons appointed to the public service and posts in connection
with the affairs of the Union and the States.
The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 provides for three types of tribunals:
 The Central Government establishes an administrative tribunal called the Central
Administrative Tribunal (CAT).
 The Central Government may, upon receipt of a request in this behalf from
any State Government, establish an administrative tribunal for such State
employees.
 Two or more States might ask for a joint tribunal, which is called the Joint
Administrative Tribunal (JAT), which exercises powers of the administrative
tribunals for such States.
o Central Administrative Tribunal
 It has jurisdiction to deal with service matters pertaining to the Central
Government employees or of any Union Territory, or local or other
government under the control of the Government of India, or of a
corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government.
o The CAT was set-up on 1 November 1985.
o It has 17 regular benches, 15 of which operate at the principal
seats of High Courts and the remaining two at Jaipur and
Lucknow.
o These Benches also hold circuit sittings at other seats of High
Courts. The tribunal consists of a Chairman, Vice-Chairman
and Members.
o The Members are drawn, both from judicial as well as
administrative streams so as to give the Tribunal the
benefit of expertise both in legal and administrative
spheres.
  The appeals against the orders of an Administrative Tribunal shall lie
before the Division Bench of the concerned High Court.
o State Administrative Tribunal
 Article 323 B empowers the state legislatures to set up tribunals for various
matters like levy, assessment, collection and enforcement of any of the tax
matters connected with land reforms covered by Article 31A.
 StateAdministrative Tribunals (SATs) to decide the service cases of state
government employees. There is a provision for setting up of a
JointAdministrative Tribunal for two or more states. On receipt of specific
requests from the Governments of Orissa, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka,
Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, administrative tribunals have been set
up, to look into the service matters of concerned state government
employees

Characteristics of Administrative Tribunals

 Administrative Tribunal is a creation of a statute.

 An Administrative Tribunal is vested in the judicial power of the State and thereby
performs quasi-judicial functions as distinguished from pure administrative
functions.
 Administrative Tribunal is bound to act judicially and follow the principles of natural
justice.
 It is required to act openly, fairly and impartially.
 An Administrative Tribunal is not bound by the strict rules of procedure and evidence
prescribed by the civil procedure court.
 Benches: There are 19 Benches in the CAT all over India.
 Objective and Composition (Sec 4): The CAT is a specialist body consisting of
Administrative Members and Judicial Members who by virtue of their specialized
knowledge are better equipped to dispense speedy and effective justice.
 A Chairman who has been a sitting or retired Judge of a High
Court heads the CAT.
Appointment and qualification (sec 6)
 The Chairman of the Central Law Commission can only be chosen by a High
Court Judge or retired person, while a Vice Chairman must have worked as a Vice
Chairman for at least two years before the Act's initiation. To be an administrative
member, someone must have experience as a Secretary in the central government
or other government services, receive a salary equivalent to that of a Government
 Secretary, or have worked as an Additional Secretary for the prescribed term.
Judicial members can be appointed if they work in the legal affairs department or
hold other posts in the legislative department.
 The President appoints the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and other members of the
Central Administrative Tribunal after consultation with the Governor of the
concerned State. However, appointments for Chairman, Vice-Chairman, or judicial
members require consultation with the Chief Justice of India.
Tenure (sec 8) – 5 years or until age of from the date on which he enters upon his office or
until he/she
attains the age of
a) Sixty eight, in the case of Chairman or Vice-Chairman
b) Sixty five, in the case of member

 Operating Principles: The Tribunal is guided by the principles of natural justice in

deciding cases and is not bound by the procedure prescribed by the Civil Procedure
Code.
 Under Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, the Tribunal
has been conferred with the power to exercise the same jurisdiction and
authority in respect of contempt of itself as a High Court.
 Independence: The conditions of service of the Chairman and Members are the
same as applicable to a Judge of High Court as per the Administrative Tribunals
(Amendment) Act, 2006.
 Appeals against Orders: The orders of the CAT are challenged by way of a Writ
Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution before the respective High
Court in whose territorial jurisdiction the Bench of the Tribunal is situated.
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS: JURISDICTION (Sec 14), POWERS AND
AUTHORITY (Sec 22)
The Administrative Tribunals Act of India, Section 14(1), grants the Central Administrative
Tribunal the authority to exercise all the jurisdiction, powers, and authority of all courts
except the Supreme Court of India under Article 136 of the Constitution. This applies to
matters of recruitment and service disputes for officers belonging to All India Services,
Civil Services of the Union, or those holding civil posts under the Union or Defence
Services. The same authority has been vested in the State and Joint Administrative
Tribunals. The Indian Constitution has a judicial review system, with no hierarchy of
administrative tribunals, unlike the French system. However, in India, one cannot appeal to
an Appellate Tribunal. The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over the decisions of the
tribunals, but no person can appeal to the Supreme Court. Administrative tribunals have the
authority to issue writs and follow the principles of natural justice in their disposal of cases.
They have the same jurisdiction, power, and authority as the High Court in respect of
"contempt of itself," punishing for contempt.
The L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India case established the jurisdictional powers of
tribunals under Articles 323A and 323B. The Supreme Court ruled that these tribunals
would remain the first instance courts in their respective areas, and litigants cannot directly
approach the High Courts.
Landmark Cases:
1. S.P. Sampath Kumar Vs. UOI
Facts: The constitutional validity of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, was
predominantly challenged on the ground that this Act excludes the jurisdiction of High
Courts under Articles 226 and 227 with regard to service matters and hence, destroyed the
concept of judicial review which was an essential feature of the Indian Constitution.
Judgements :
The five-Judge Bench of the Court upheld the validity of the Act, except for Section 6(1)
(c). The court ruled that while the Act excluded the jurisdiction of judicial review by High
Courts in service matters, it did not entirely exclude the concept of judicial review. The
Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Article 32 and 136 remains intact. The court also noted
that judicial review can still entertain matters of injustice if an alternative institutional
mechanism or authority is provided. However, Section 6(1)(c) was deemed
unconstitutional as it gave the government unrestricted power to appoint the
Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and other members of the tribunals. The court
recommended that the term of 5 years prescribed under the Act should be reasonably
extended to discourage good and generous people from accepting the job. The Supreme
Court's directions came into effect through the Administrative Tribunals (Amendment) Act,
1987.
2. Union of India v. R. Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association
Facts:
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate
Tribunal (NCLAT) are deemed constitutional due to the lack of legislative authority to
transfer judicial functions from traditional High Courts. The transfer of the entire company
jurisdiction to the tribunal violates the Rule of Law, Separation of Powers, and
Independence of the Judiciary doctrine. Additionally, the provisions of Part 1B and 1C of
the Companies Act are deemed defective and unconstitutional.
Judgement:
The court upheld the constitutionality of NCLT and NCLAT in exercising the powers and
jurisdiction of the High Court, subject to necessary changes to the Companies Act, 1956, as
amended in 2002. The court acknowledged the constitutional power of Parliament to create
tribunals for dispute adjudication, which can be traced to Articles 245, 246 and 247 of the
Constitution. The court also noted that the constitution of tribunals and transferring judicial
powers does not infringe on the rule of law, separation of powers, and independence of the
judiciary. The court emphasized that the most important issue is whether the constituted
tribunals respect and maintain these principles. The constitution of NCLT and NCLAT
must be subject to judicial review to ensure these principles are not compromised by
tribunalisation and may interfere to preserve them.
Limitations
i) The administrative tribunals do not rely on uniform precedents and hence, this
might lead to arbitrary and inconsistent decisions.
ii) There is no hierarchy of administrative tribunals and this has completely excluded
the scope of judicial review on service matters.
iii) The tribunals consist of administrative members and technical heads who may not
possess any background of law or judicial work.
iv) The administrative tribunals as discussed earlier have the power to issue writs,
which till now was exercised only by Supreme Court and High Court under the
Constitution.
v) One more inadequacy noticeable in the present administrative tribunals is from the
structural - functional angle. This is the absence of an appellate forum within the
tribunal which causes considerable inconvenience. For example, if a bench of
tribunal gives a judgement, it has got applicability all over the country as there is
only one CentralAdministrativeTribunal for whole of India and the various benches
located in different parts of the country are parts of the same tribunal. If there was
such an appellate mechanism within the tribunal system, wherein appeals can be
filed against any unsatisfactory judgement, it would have been a desirable form of
obtaining justice both for the government employees as well as the government.
Advantages of Administrative Tribunals
1. Flexiblity
2. Speedy Justice
3. Less Expensive
4. Quality Justice
5. Relief to Courts
Disadvantage
1. Against the Rule of Law
2. Lack of specified procedure
3. No prediction of future decisions (bsz no precedents)
4. Scope of Arbitrariness
5. Absence of legal expertis
Difference between Court and Tribunal
No. Court of Law Tribunal

A court of law is a part of

the traditional judicial An Administrative Tribunal is
1.
system whereby judicial powers are an agency created by the statute and
derived from the state. invested with judicial power.

Tribunal is also known as the Quasi-

The Civil Courts have judicial
judicial body. Tribunals have the
power to try all suits of a civil
2. power to try cases of special matter
nature unless the cognizance is
which are conferred on them by
expressly or impliedly barred.
statutes

Judges of the ordinary courts of law Tenure, terms and conditions of the
are independent of the executive in services of the members
3. respect of their tenure, terms and of Administrative Tribunal are
conditions of service etc. Judiciary entirely in the hands of
is independent of Executive Executive (government).

The president or a member of the

The presiding officer of the court Tribunal may not be trained as well in
4.
of law is trained in law. law. He may be an expert in the field
of Administrative matters.

A judge of a court of law must be An Administrative Tribunal may be a

5. impartial who is not interested in party to the dispute to be decided by
the matter directly or indirectly. it.

A court of law is bound by all An Administrative Tribunal is not

6. the rules of evidence and bound by rules but bound by
procedure. the principles of nature of Justice.

Administrative Tribunal may decide

Court must decide all
questions by taking into account
questions objectively on the basis
7. departmental policy, the decision of
of evidence and materials on
Administrative Tribunal may be
record.
subjective rather than objective.

8. A court of law can decide vires of a Administrative Tribunal cannot do so

 legislation

Disciplinary proceedings

Introduction

Government employees are expected to uphold a certain standard of conduct in both official
and private roles, and they have a responsibility towards the public and government. To
enforce this, various acts and regulations, including the Central Civil Service Conduct (Rules)
1964, are in place, defining the duties of civil servants.

However, as Lord Acton argued, power can corrupt, leading to misconduct such as shirking
work, not following rules, and engaging in misconduct. To discipline and control these
issues, the service rules provide the concept of departmental proceedings. Overall, the
responsibility of government employees lies with the public and government.

Central Civil Service Conduct Rules

The Central Civil Service Conduct and Rules (CCS) was notified on 30th November
1964, and it applies to all individuals appointed to Central civil service or post, including
civilians in defense of service. The rules do not apply to railway servants, members of the
All India Services, or those directed by the president that these rules should not apply.

There are 25 rules in this Act, which civil servants can be subjected to inquiry for violating.
The most vital rules include maintaining absolute integrity, devoting to duty, conforming to
ordinary norms of decency and morality, and performing official dealings promptly and
courteously. The government has the discretion to determine conduct, and actions can be
taken for past misconduct committed by government servants.

Civil servants are prohibited from engaging in sexual harassment of working women,
including physical contact, demands for sexual pleasures, passing sexually colored remarks,
showing pornography, and other unwelcome conduct. Near relatives of government servants
should not be employed with firms or companies they deal with in their official capacity.

Involvement in strike, picketing, Gherao, connection with press or media, criticism of the
government, consumption of intoxicated drinks and drugs during office hours, and
habitual late attendance, absence without leave, non-performance of contract, and
disorderly behavior during office hours are also prohibited.

If a civil servant is convicted on criminal charges by court, they may face action against
them. Involvement in infidelity, fraud, trustworthiness, and habitual late attendance, absence
without leave, non-performance of contract, and disorderly behavior during office hours are
also considered misconduct.
Disciplinary Proceedings against a Govt. Servant

Government servants are crucial in the administration of a country, serving as pillars of

government departments responsible for implementing policies and providing public services
to citizens. They also forward public grievances and demands to higher-ups for resolution.
The loyalty of these servants allowed the British to rule India for a longer period.
Government employees have a different work culture and responsibilities compared to
private sector employees, with smart pay, privileges, and facilities, but also heavy
responsibilities towards the government and the public. With increased education,
information technology, and public awareness of fundamental rights, the responsibility of
government employees has increased and become time-bound. To ensure their best
performance, constitutional safeguards have been provided to ensure their commitment to the
country.

Discipline authority

Discipline authority is a person tasked with imposing penalties for misconduct, typically
based on the employee's position and the CCA rules.

There are two types of authority: one can impose major penalties and another can impose
minor penalties.

The definition of disciplinary authority is outlined in part XIV of the Constitution, which
pertains to 'Services the Union and states'. Articles 309, 310, and 311 pertain to disciplinary
proceedings.
Article 309 grants the legislature power to enact laws and rules regarding public servant
disciplinary activity, as outlined in CSS (CCA) rules 1965.
Article 310, also known as the 'Pleasure Doctrine,' allows the President to appoint Union civil
government based on its pleasure, which can only be overridden by express provisions in the
constitution.
Article 311 deals with dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank of civil servants employed
under union or state, with the dismissal procedure not applicable to defense personnel.

Approach of disciplinary authority

The approach of disciplinary authority is clearly mentioned in guidelines of government to

the disciplinary authority.

 Advance warning- The disciplinary authority should inform employees about the
expected behavior and consequences of bad behavior.
 Consistency- Disciplinary authority should have an even behavior against
everybody and should dispose of cases efficiently and accurately in less time.
 Impersonal-This means no nepotism should be done for anyone, or unbiased
inquiry and entertainment of cases must be done from disciplinary authority side.
 In certain cases, good conduct in past career of the employee can be taken into
account while giving the judgment in certain specific cases.

 Immediate action-Immediate imposition of the penalty is expected on behalf of

the disciplinary committee without any delay, if other procedural steps of inquiry
and ordering of penalties has been completed. Immediate message of imposition of
penalty must be communicatedd to civil servant eligible to face the penalty.
Process of Imposing penalty by disciplinary authority

The process of imposing penalties by disciplinary authorities involves a systematic approach

from the complaint to the final decision and appeal.

The Inquiring Officer (I O) or Presenting Officer (PO) is responsible for investigating cases
and determining the appropriate authority.

If an employee is suspended, the next steps include a preliminary warning, training, or

counseling to improve and correct the employee.

The authority may consult with the Central Vigilance Committee (CVC) or other authorities
if necessary. If a charge sheet is needed, it can be issued according to Rule 14(3) of
CCS(CCA). The next step is to determine if an oral hearing is necessary for minor penalties.
If the charge sheet issue is resolved, the matter should be addressed to determine if an inquiry
or penalty should be imposed. The final order is passed regarding the complaint against the
civil servant. If an employee appeals the decision, it should be forwarded to the appellate
authority who has the right to entertain appeal cases.

Departmental Proceedings Against Public Servants

• Complaint or allegations of misconduct lodged.

• Preliminary inquiry held.
• Discipline authority considers the report.
• Show cause notice given to the delinquent official.
• Employee responds to the notice.
• Charge-sheet issued if unsatisfactory reply.
• Employee responds to the charge-sheet.
• Discipline authority scrutinizes the reply.
• Appointment of Enquiry Officer and nomination of Presenting Officer.
• Legal assistance for defense.
• Witness examination and attendance.
• Submission of inquiry report.
• Show cause notice to delinquent employee.
• Proposed penalty.
• Final order.
• Service appeal.
The procedure for disciplinary proceedings in India is outlined in Service Rules and Standing
Orders, but it is subordinated to the Constitution of India. The principal of natural justice
must be followed, and a reasonable opportunity to defend oneself must be given to the
person against whom departmental proceedings have been initiated.

Acquittal in criminal proceedings does not entitle the delinquent to claim immunity from
disciplinary proceedings, as observed by the Supreme Court in case C.M.D.U.C.O. Vs P.C.
Kakkar,

Departmental proceedings may continue even after an employee's retirement. U.P.S.S.

Corp.Ltd. Vs K.S.Tandon

The process begins with lodging a complaint with the disciplinary authority, which holds a
preliminary inquiry to ascertain the prima facie truth in the allegations. The complaint can be
made by an ordinary citizen or superior officer of the employee.

In State of U.P. Vs C.S. Sharma, the disciplinary authority informed an inquiry officer that
they believed the delinquent was guilty, which was deemed invalid as they expressed their
opinion, vitiating the entire inquiry proceedings.

The Inquiry Officer must be a person with an open and free mind, who can act objectively,
free from any kind of bias.(S.Parthasarathy Vs State of A.P