Law Commission Report Summary- Assessment of Statutory Frameworks of Tribunals in India.pdf
 
The Law Commission of India (Chairperson: Dr. Justice B. S. Chauhan) submitted its report on 
'Assessment of Statutory Frameworks of Tribunals in India' to the Ministry of Law and Justice on October 
27, 2017.  Tribunals are quasi-judicial institutions set 
up to address delays in disposal of cases in courts. 
 
The matter was referred to the Commission by the Supreme Court.  The report examined issues related to: (i) constitution of tribunals, (ii) appointment of the chairman and members of tribunals, and (iii) service 
conditions of the members of tribunals. 
 
Pendency in tribunals:  The Commission observed 
that the high pendency of cases in some tribunals indicates that the objective of setting them up has not 
been achieved. 

Tribunal 
Number of 
pending cases 
Central Administrative Tribunal 
44,333 
Railway Claims Tribunal 
45,604 
Debt Recovery Tribunal 
78,118 
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appeal Tribunal 
90,592 
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 
91,538 

Note: Data on number of pending cases available for different dates for different tribunals during the 2016-17 period. Source: 272nd Report of the Law Commission of India. 

 
Selection of members:  The Commission stated that 
the selection of members should be impartial.  It suggested that the involvement of government agencies should be minimal, since the government is typically a party in every litigation.   
 
The Commission recommended that the chairman, vice-chairman, and judicial members of tribunals should be appointed by a selection committee headed by the Chief Justice of India or a sitting judge of the Supreme Court.  Further, the selection committee should have two nominees of the central government. The appointment of other members such as administrative members, accountant members, and technical members should be undertaken by a 
DISCLAIMER: This document is being furnished to you for your information.  You may choose to reproduce or redistribute this report for non-commercial purposes in part or in full to any other person with due acknowledgement of PRS Legislative Research ("PRS").  The opinions expressed herein are entirely those of the author(s).  PRS makes every effort to use reliable and comprehensive information, but PRS does not represent that the contents of the report are accurate or complete.  PRS is an independent, not-for-profit group.  This document has been prepared without regard to the objectives or opinions of those who may receive it. 

separate selection committee headed by a nominee of the central government, appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice of India.   

 
Uniformity in service conditions:  The Commission 
noted that currently there is no uniformity in the age of retirement of tribunal members.  It recommended that there should be uniformity in the appointment, tenure, and service conditions for the: (i) chairman, (ii) vice-chairman, and (iii) members of tribunals. The chairman should hold office for three years or till the age of 70, whichever is earlier.  The vicechairman should hold office for three years or till the age of 67. 
 
Further, the Commission recommended that to ensure uniformity across all affairs of various tribunals, the function of monitoring their working should be transferred to a single nodal agency, set up under the Ministry of Law and Justice. 
 
Appeal:  The Commission observed that tribunals 
were established to reduce the burden on courts.  It 
recommended that appeals against a tribunal's order 
should lie before a High Court only where the law establishing such a tribunal does not establish an appellate tribunal.  Further, orders of an appellate tribunal may be challenged before the division bench of the High Court having jurisdiction over the appellate tribunal. 
 
The Commission observed that if decisions of appellate tribunals are appealed before High Courts regularly, the purpose of establishing tribunals may be defeated.  It suggested that a party aggrieved by an 
appellate tribunal's decision should be able to 
approach only the Supreme Court on grounds of public or national importance. 
 
Benches of tribunals:  Tribunals should have 
benches in different parts of the country to ensure access to justice by people across geographical areas. These benches should be located where High Courts are situated. 
Assessment of Statutory Frameworks of Tribunals in India