Administrative tribunals are specialized adjudicatory bodies established outside the traditional structure of civil courts to resolve disputes between citizens and government departments.
1. Why Tribunals are Needed
Traditional civil courts are governed under rigid procedural codes (CPC) and the Evidence Act, leading to heavy delays and high litigation costs. Tribunals offer a specialized alternative characterized by rapid dispute resolution, low procedural costs, and decision-making driven by administrative or technical experts.
2. Court vs. Tribunal (The Robson Distinction)
| Feature | Ordinary Court | Administrative Tribunal |
|---|---|---|
| Rules of Evidence | Strict compliance with Indian Evidence Act required. | Flexible. Governed by Principles of Natural Justice. |
| Composition | Exclusively judicial officers trained in law. | Mix of judicial members and department/technical experts. |
| Procedure | Rigidly bound by Civil Procedure Code (CPC). | Powers to regulate own procedure to ensure speed. |
3. Constitutional Framework & Articles 323A and 323B
The 42nd Amendment added Part XIV-A to the Constitution, providing statutory power to establish tribunals:
- Article 323A: Allows Parliament to establish tribunals for resolving service disputes of public servants (leading to the Central Administrative Tribunal - CAT).
- Article 323B: Allows Parliament or State Legislatures to establish tribunals for tax, labor, land reform, foodstuff, and environmental disputes.
Previously, the government tried to exclude High Court jurisdiction over tribunal decisions. The Supreme Court struck down these exclusion clauses, holding that the power of judicial review of High Courts (Art 226/227) and the Supreme Court (Art 32) is part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be excluded. All decisions of administrative tribunals are subject to challenge before a Division Bench of the respective High Court.