More Stories

Informist, Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2025

 

NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court Wednesday struck down provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 regarding the appointment, service conditions and tenure of tribunal members, as unconstitutional. These provisions violate the constitutional principles of separation of powers and judicial independence, which are firmly embedded in the text, structure, and spirit of the Constitution, said a bench led by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai.

 

"The minimum age bar of 50 years for all appointments, the truncated four-year tenure with upper age caps of 70/67, the requirement that the search-cum-selection Committee forward a panel of two names for each vacancy, and the fixing of allowances and benefits to those of equivalent civil servants are all provisions which have already been judicially tested and struck down," said the top court. The court has expressly held in earlier decisions that these measures are arbitrary, destructive of judicial independence and amount to an impermissible legislative override of binding directions, said the bench, which also comprisied Justice K. Vinod Chandran.

 

The Tribunals Reforms Act directly contradicts binding judicial pronouncements that have repeatedly clarified the standards governing the appointment, tenure, and functioning of tribunal members, said the top court. Instead of curing the defects identified by the court, the Tribunals Reforms Act merely reproduces, in slightly altered form, the provisions earlier struck down, said the court. This amounts to a legislative override in the strictest sense and an attempt to nullify binding judicial directions without addressing the underlying constitutional infirmities, the court added.

 

The court was hearing petitions by Madras Bar Association, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, and others who challenged the provisions of the 2021 Act. By diluting the judiciary's role in appointments, tenure, and service conditions of tribunal members, the provisions of the 2021 Act infringes on the basic structure and contravenes Articles 14, 21 and 50 of the Constitution, as well as binding decisions of the court, said the petitioners.

 

The delegation of authority to the executive to frame rules regarding appointments, allowances, and conditions of service is excessive and encroaches upon core judicial functions, said the petitioners. The 2021 Act also nullifies judicially framed rules by reintroducing provisions previously struck down, such as the minimum age requirement, a truncated four-year tenure, and the process of recommending multiple names, thereby frustrating the court's directions, said the petitioners. The 2021 Act imposes arbitrary age and tenure restrictions that discourage meritorious candidates below 50 years from joining tribunals, the petitioners added. The executive's control over allowances and house rent entitlement of tribunal members compromises judicial independence, while the continued failure to establish an independent National Tribunals Commission leaves tribunals under executive control, particularly within the Ministry of Finance, they said.

 

In 2020, the Supreme Court had struck down the Tribunal Rules 2020. In 2021, the top court had struck down the Tribunal Reforms Ordinance 2021. In these cases, the apex court had mandated that tribunal members should have at least five-year tenure, and that lawyers with minimum 10 years of experience must be considered for appointments. However, through the 2021 Act, the tenure of members was reduced to four years and a minimum age limit of 50 years was introduced for the members. 

 

On Wednesday, the top court said that unless Parliament enacts an appropriate legislation, its earlier decisions shall continue to govern all matters relating to the appointment, qualifications, tenure, service conditions, and allied aspects concerning tribunal members and chairpersons. Earlier judgments represent the binding constitutional standards necessary to preserve judicial independence and to ensure that tribunals function as effective and impartial adjudicatory bodies. Accordingly, they shall operate as the controlling framework, said the court. 

 

The apex court said it had consistently directed in earlier judgments that the executive bears a constitutional obligation to establish a National Tribunals Commission in accordance with the principles and framework articulated therein. The creation of such a commission is an essential structural safeguard designed to ensure independence, transparency, and uniformity in the appointment, administration, and functioning of tribunals across the country, said the court. It granted the Union of India a period of four months from the date of this judgment to establish a National Tribunals Commission.

 

The service conditions of all such members of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal who were appointed in September 2021 shall be governed by the old Act and the old rules. All appointments of members and chairpersons whose selection or recommendation by the search-cum-selection committee was completed before the commencement of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, but whose formal appointment notifications were issued after the Act came into force, shall be protected. Such appointments will continue to be governed by the parent statutes and by the conditions of service as laid down in decisions of the court in 2020 and 2021, the bench added.  End 

 

Reported by Surya Tripathi

Edited by Tanima Banerjee

 

For users of real-time market data terminals, Informist news is available exclusively on the NSE Cogencis WorkStation.

 

Cogencis news is now Informist news. This follows the acquisition of Cogencis Information Services Ltd. by NSE Data & Analytics Ltd., a 100% subsidiary of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. As a part of the transaction, the news department of Cogencis has been sold to Informist Media Pvt. Ltd.

 

Informist Media Tel +91 (22) 6985-4000

Send comments to feedback@informistmedia.com

 

© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2025. All rights reserved.