‘Trying To Avoid This Bench, Don’t Indulge In Such Tactics’, SC To Centre On Challenge To Tribunals Law

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday expressed its discontent at an application filed by the Centre seeking a direction to refer to a larger bench the pleas challenging the provisions of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Act, 2021.

The matter came up for hearing before a bench led by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and comprising Justice K Vinod Chandran.

The bench noted that it has already heard final arguments on behalf of petitioners, including lead petitioner Madras Bar Association, in the matter. The bench minced no words in criticizing the Centre that it now wants the matter to be referred to a larger bench.

The bench said that on the last date of hearing, the attorney general did not raise these objections; instead, an adjournment was sought on personal grounds.

“You cannot raise these objections after hearing them fully on merits”, said the bench, adding, “We do not expect the Union to indulge in such tactics”.

Attorney General R Venkataramani requested the bench that its application seeking a hearing by a larger bench should not be misunderstood. It was submitted before the bench that, on this aspect, preliminary objections were already part of the Centre’s reply.

The CJI, who is demitting office on November 23, orally observed that it appears that the Centre wants to avoid the present bench.

“If we reject this application by you, we will observe that the Union is trying to avoid this bench. We will not hear all this now after we have heard one side on merits….”, said the bench.

The AG stressed that the 2021 law was passed after due deliberations and some time should be given to get it stabilized, and asked it should be struck down because of these issues?

The bench said at the fag end of the hearing, the matter regarding hearing by a larger bench cannot be raised

The bench asked the AG to confine his response to the submissions made by senior advocate Arvind Datar, who argued against the law.

The bench made it clear that if, during the course of arguments, it thinks the matter is required to be considered by a larger bench, then it will do it, but it would not happen on the basis of an application filed by the Centre. AG, commencing his arguments, stressed that the government came out with the law after a long gestation period, and the court should not set aside the law.

The AG referred to the provisions of the law in connection with minimum term and prerequisites for appointments in various tribunals, and added, “Merit cannot be sacrificed for selections to take place from the waitlist…”.

The bench will continue to hear the matter on Friday.

On October 16, the apex court commenced the final hearing on the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Act.

The 2021 Act abolishes certain appellate tribunals, including the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal, and amends various terms related to the appointment and tenure of judicial and other members of various tribunals.