Case Note & Summary
The judgment involves a batch of writ petitions challenging the vires of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021. The petitioners, led by the Madras Bar Association, contend that the Act undermines judicial independence and the constitutional scheme of separation of powers. The Act empowers the Central Government to make rules on qualifications, appointments, salaries, and service conditions of tribunal members, and establishes a Search-cum-Selection Committee for appointments. It prescribes tenures of four years and age limits for Chairpersons and Members, and allows removal under certain grounds. The Act also abolishes many existing tribunals and transfers their functions to courts. The challenge is set against a background of previous Supreme Court decisions on tribunal reforms. The introduction, quoting Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, emphasizes the supremacy of the Constitution and the need for mutual respect among the organs of governance. The judgment, authored by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, was to examine the validity of the Act after hearing submissions from senior counsel for the petitioners and the Attorney General. However, the provided excerpt ends before the analysis and decision.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 violates the Constitution, particularly the principles of separation of powers and judicial independence.
