"Pass Another Legislation If They Pass A Judgment"-Some Bureaucrats Might Be There To Advise The Govt. For It-SC in Tribunal Matter -Full Courtroom Exchange

The Centre on Monday told the Supreme Court that the new law, the 2021 Tribunals Reforms Act, "has made the way for filling up vacancies in the tribunals", and as the first step, it will act on cases where the search cum selection committee has given the recommendations but a decision on appointments has not been taken."The government will ensure that within the next two weeks, a decision on appointments to all the tribunals, where the aforesaid committee has already given the recommendation to the government, is taken", told SG Tushar Mehta, quoting from a letter addressed to him from the Ministry of Finance.The letter also conveyed that Rules under the new Tribunal Reforms Act are in the process of being finalised and will be notified immediately.On Monday, Chief Justice N. V. Ramana had initially refused to adjourn the matter on the request of the SG that it is AG K. K. Venugopal who is conversant in the facts of the case right from its inception and that AG has some personal difficulty for a couple of days. "No, sorry. Last time, we made it very clear. We have set up a special bench, disturbing 2 other benches. We have earlier heard these matters and passed detailed judgements. There is no respect for the judgements of this court, that is what we are feeling! There is testing the patience of the court! Last time, you made a statement that you have appointed some persons? How many people have you appointed?", asked the CJ. "Some persons in CAT- that is what I was informed... the learned AG is genuinely in difficulty today. I won't say anything beyond that...", replied the SG."We have no issue with that. The attorney general need not come...", said the CJ."I received some instructions today. I can screen share. It is a letter from the Ministry of Finance of today, addressed to me. They say that wherever there is a recommendation, a decision on the appointment would be taken in 2 weeks- that is the assurance which the government is giving", continued the SG, sharing the aforesaid letter.At this, Justice L. Nageswara Rao remarked, "The recommendations which we had made 1 1/2 years back, based on the law as it was then, in respect of which the government could not have had any objections- as regards the conditions of service, panel of persons and all- why were appointments not made? Some tribunals are on the verge of closing down! They are functioning with one member, they are on the verge of extinction! We can understand that there was some law which was in the offing and the Union of India was saying it will make appointments according to it, but these were recommendations made strictly in accordance with the law as it existed then!"Justice D. Y. Chandrachud added, "I am talking about the NCLT and the NCLAT because a lot of IBC cases come before me. These tribunals are critical to the economy. They are the cornerstone of the government's policy for reconstruction and rehabilitation of the corporate sector. Because of the vacancies, NCLT and NCLAT cannot dispose off matters or adhere to timelines! There is an outer limit of 330 days for completing the corporate insolvency resolution process. There is a judgment of our court saying that except in exceptional circumstances, this is a mandatory period and companies have to go into liquidation! With the NCLT and NCLAT not being manned, a very critical situation has arisen!""The same thing goes for the AFT! We have Article 32 petitions coming before us because all the present and retired members of the tribunal are saying there is no possibility of early resolution", continued the judge."I was once chairing the selection committee for the NCDRC. The new memorandum of procedure said first get the IB report and then shortlist the appointments. Once you make the recommendations, there is no question of IB raising any objections. So the names which are sent by the selection committee are all IB cleared. Unless IB clears, we don't send those names because we don't want to get into a thicket. Notwithstanding that, the names recommended are either deleted or there is no clarity why they are deleted. And the recommendations are not only by a single judge of the Supreme Court but senior officials of the bureaucracy! It is a waste of energy also!", expressed Justice Chandrachud.Justice Chandrachud added, "The NCDRC was giving dates after one year. We got 136 petitions, saying 'Look at the Act, the next adjournment is granted after one year. We can't direct the President to constitute a bench. He will say 'I will constitute and take away the listing for some other matter'! Consumers come before us and say 'I have some small issue and the next date I am getting is after one year.'""And all can't even come before the Supreme Court or High Court!", said the CJ.Justice Rao reflected on the dilemma at hand after Justice Chandrachud's remarks:"And we have to deal with the burden. We have appeals against interlocutory orders from NCLT. Keeping in mind the outer limit, we are...

"Pass Another Legislation If They Pass A Judgment"-Some Bureaucrats Might Be There To Advise The Govt. For It-SC in Tribunal Matter -Full Courtroom Exchange

Mehal Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Mehal Jain

"Pass Another Legislation If They Pass A Judgment"-Some Bureaucrats Might Be There To Advise The Govt. For It-SC in Tribunal Matter -Full Courtroom Exchange

Mehal Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Mehal Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers