Particle.news
Download on the App Store

Supreme Court Grills Centre Over Reenacting Quashed Tribunal Provisions

The bench sought a clear justification for the 2021 law’s tenure and eligibility rules that mirror measures earlier invalidated.

Overview

  • The bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran asked how Parliament could reintroduce provisions previously set aside, cautioning that minor wording changes cannot revive what the Court struck down.
  • Attorney General R Venkataramani defended the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 as a deliberated, uniform framework that balances independence with efficiency and argued that judicial members predominate in selection with the CJI nominee holding a casting vote.
  • The Court questioned the minimum entry age of 50 and raised concerns about short fixed terms with reappointment, noting that security of tenure is essential for institutional independence.
  • The Centre highlighted that the Act provides a four-year term with the possibility of reappointment, raises retirement ages to 70 for presiding officers and 67 for members, and consolidates appointments through a Search-cum-Selection Committee.
  • Petitioners including the Madras Bar Association argued the law undermines judicial independence, as the Court also recorded displeasure at the government’s late bid to adjourn proceedings and seek a five-judge reference, with hearings set to continue.