<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<root>
    <author>ENA</author>
    <category>Sectors</category>
    <date>2025-11-19 17:13:24</date>
    <fulldesc>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New Delhi, Nov 19 (KNN)&lt;/strong&gt; The Supreme Court on Wednesday, November 19, struck down the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, which governed the appointments, tenure, and service conditions of members of various tribunals.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;A bench comprising Chief Justice, India, B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran held that the Act contravenes constitutional principles of separation of powers and judicial independence.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The bench expressed displeasure at the Union Government for failing to implement directions from earlier judgments related to tribunal appointments. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The Court noted that the 2021 Act effectively re-enacted provisions previously struck down. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;It concluded that the Act is unsustainable because it undermines the principles of separation of powers and judicial independence. The Act effectively attempts legislative overruling of binding judicial rulings without addressing the flaws identified in them.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The provisions of the Impugned Act cannot be sustained. They violate constitutional principles embedded in the text, structure, and spirit of the Constitution, the Court stated. Instead of curing the defects identified by this Court, the impugned Act merely reproduces&amp;mdash;in slightly altered form&amp;mdash;the very provisions previously struck down, a move that is impermissible under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The Supreme Court, in an earlier judgment, had directed the Centre to establish a National Tribunals Commission.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;Until Parliament enacts a new law consistent with prior judgments, the Court directed that the guidelines established in the Madras Bar Association (MBA IV and MBA V) cases will continue to operate. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;This includes minimum tenure of five years for tribunal members, eligibility of lawyers with at least 10 years of experience, and other standards related to appointments, selection panels, and service conditions.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The Court clarified that appointments made before the commencement of the 2021 Act, even if notifications were issued after it came into force, will be protected under the parent statutes and prior judgments, rather than the truncated tenure and altered service conditions introduced by the Act.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;Chief Justice Gavai, in the judgment, emphasised that Parliament cannot simply re-enact a measure previously struck down by the Court. A valid legislative response must cure the constitutional defects identified and ensure compliance with judicial reasoning. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The judgment also rejected the Union Governments plea to refer the matter to a larger bench, noting that the request was belated and could undermine fairness in the hearing.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The Court observed that legislation affecting tribunals must respect independence, impartiality, and effective adjudication, warning that arbitrary tenure limits or executive control over appointments strike at the core of constitutional governance. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;The ruling follows a series of judgments, including the 2020 MBA IV case (striking down Tribunal Rules, 2020) and the 2021 MBA V case (striking down the Tribunal Reforms Ordinance, 2021), reinforcing the principle that tribunal members independence is essential to upholding the Constitution.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:14px&quot;&gt;(KNN Bureau)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
</fulldesc>
    <id>44134</id>
    <link>https://knnindia.co.in/news/newsdetails/sectors/supreme-court-strikes-down-tribunal-reforms-act-2021-citing-violation-of-judicial-independence</link>
    <pubDate>2025-11-19 17:13:24</pubDate>
    <source>knnindia.co.in</source>
    <title>Supreme Court Strikes Down Tribunal Reforms Act 2021, Citing Violation Of Judicial Independence</title>
</root>
