ADVANTAGES OF

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

Flexibility
Adequate Justice
Less Expensive
Relief to Courts

DISADVANTAGES OF
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS
Administrative adjudication is a
negation of Rule of Law.
Administrative tribunals sometimes
violate even the principles of natural
justice.
Administrative tribunals often hold
summary trials and they do not follow
any precedents.
A uniform code of procedure in
administrative adjudication is not there.
Administrative tribunals are manned by

STATUS
& WORKING
OF TRIBUNALS
IN INDIA
who
by virtue
of some
statutory provision
have the power and duty to act judicially in
determining disputes which come before
it. Tribunals as stated earlier are distinct
from the ordinary courts of the land and as
per Chandra kumars case they are not on
par with the High Courts but serve a
supplemental function to the High Courts.
They are therefore subject to the writ
jurisdiction of the superior judiciary and to
the power of judicial review exercisable by
the superior judiciary. In most of the
tribunals appeals from their decisions lie in
the High Court on substantial questions of
law.

All tribunals in India are arranged on

the following basis:
-Created by a statute
-subject to the writ jurisdiction of the superior
judiciary and to judicial review.
-Manned by experts and persons with judicial
experience.
-subject to the superintendence of the concerned
High Court under Art.227
-Decisions may be final or appealable within the
tribunal or in certain cases to the High Court.

appeals against orders of the tribunal may be

heard by the Supreme Court by special leave
under Art. 136

and adduce evidence.

TRIBUNALS AND NATURAL JUSTICE:
In Union of India v. T.R. Verma34 the Supreme
Court held the following to be part of natural
justice:
a) Party must be able to adduce all evidence
being relied upon.
b) Evidence must be taken in the presence of both
parties.
c) Must be given opportunity to cross- examine.
d) And no material must be relied upon without
giving the party opportunity to explain the
evidence.
Tribunals are free to evolve their own method
of procedure as long as they conform to the
principles of natural justice as outlined above.

CONCLUSION
Very few of the tribunals have been able to inspire
confidence in the public.
Tribunals have shown a singular lack of competence and
objectivity in determining disputes.
Another reason for their failure is the constitution of the
tribunals and the method of appointment of the
personnel.
Persons with expertise and the right qualifications do not
want to sit on these tribunals thus leading to the
unsatisfactory functioning of these tribunals.
The uncertainty of tenure and political interference have
further impeded the proper development of tribunals in
India.