Question

Consider the following statements with regard to Tribunals under Article 323B:

(i) Article 323B empowers both Parliament and State Legislatures to establish tribunals for matters such as taxation, land reforms, and elections.
(ii) Tribunals under Article 323B must be established in a hierarchical structure.
(iii) The jurisdiction of High Courts and the Supreme Court over tribunals under Article 323B was completely excluded by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

• A. only (i)
• B. only (ii)
• C. only (i) and (ii)
• D. all the above

Answer 1

Answer:

C. only (i) and (ii)

Understanding Tribunals in India: Articles 323A and 323B

• The concept of tribunals was introduced in the Indian Constitution by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976.
• This amendment added a new Part XIV-A to the Constitution, titled "Tribunals", comprising two articles: Article 323A and Article 323B.

Article 323B: Tribunals for Other Matters

• Scope and Authority:
  • Article 323B empowers both the Parliament and the State Legislatures to establish tribunals.
  • These tribunals are specifically for the adjudication or trial of disputes, complaints, or offences related to certain specified matters.
  • This provision ensures that a wide range of administrative disputes can be handled by specialized bodies, reducing the burden on traditional courts.
• Matters Covered:
  • The matters for which tribunals can be established under Article 323B are exhaustively listed in the article itself.
  • Key areas include:
    • Taxation
    • Foreign exchange, import and export
    • Industrial and labour disputes
    • Land reforms
    • Ceiling on urban property
    • Elections to Parliament and State Legislatures
    • Foodstuffs and other essential goods
  • The power to establish tribunals for these matters is distributed between the Centre and the States based on their legislative competence.
• Hierarchical Structure:
  • Tribunals established under Article 323B, especially for complex areas like taxation or land reforms, are often designed with a hierarchical structure.
  • This means there can be lower-level tribunals and appellate tribunals within the system (e.g., Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)).
  • This structure facilitates internal review, reduces the number of cases going directly to High Courts, and ensures specialized appellate oversight within the tribunal system itself.
  • The establishment of a hierarchical structure helps in ensuring fairness, consistency, and efficiency in dispute resolution.

Judicial Review and Tribunals: The L. Chandra Kumar Case

• Original Intent of 42nd Amendment:
  • The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 aimed to drastically limit the power of judicial review of High Courts and the Supreme Court over tribunal decisions.
  • Specifically, clauses (2)(d) of Article 323A and (3)(d) of Article 323B stated that tribunals would function to the "exclusion of the jurisdiction of all courts, except the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 136".
  • This meant that High Courts could not exercise their powers under Article 226 (writ jurisdiction) and Article 227 (supervisory jurisdiction) over these tribunals.
• The Landmark Verdict: L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997):
  • This watershed judgment by a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court critically re-evaluated the constitutional validity of the exclusion clauses introduced by the 42nd Amendment.
  • The Supreme Court held that the power of judicial review vested in the High Courts (under Articles 226 and 227) and the Supreme Court (under Articles 32 and 136) constitutes an integral and essential part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
  • Therefore, the provisions in Articles 323A(2)(d) and 323B(3)(d) that sought to completely exclude the jurisdiction of High Courts and the Supreme Court were declared unconstitutional and void.
  • The Court clarified that:
    • Tribunals would act as courts of first instance.
    • Appeals from tribunals would lie directly to the Division Bench of the concerned High Court.
    • The High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226/227 over the decisions of tribunals was restored and reaffirmed.
  • This ruling ensured that the constitutional scheme of judicial review remains intact, safeguarding fundamental rights and the rule of law.