According to Servai, „the development of Administrative Law in a welfare state has made "Administrative Tribunals a Necessity " Administrative tribunals are authorities outside the ordinary court system, which interpret and apply the Laws when acts of public administration are questioned in formal suits by the courts or by other established methods. They are not a court nor are they an executive body. Rather they are a mixture of both. They are judicial in the sense that the tribunals have to decide facts and apply them impartially, without considering executive policy. Also the same was reiterated by the Central Adminstrative Tribunal in the case of G Mohanti v. UOI. They are administrative because the reasons for preferring them to the ordinary courts of Law are administrative reasons.
The Supreme Court in Jaswant Sugar Mills Vs. Lakshmi Chand laid down the following characteristics or tests to determine whether an authority is a tribunal or not:
1. Power of adjudication must be derived from a statute or statutory rule.
2. It must possess the trappings of a court and thereby be vested with the power to summon witnesses, administer oath, compel production of evidence, etc.
3. Tribunals are not bound by strict rules of evidence.
4. They are to exercise their functions objectively and judicially and to apply the law and resolve disputes independently of executive policy.
5. Tribunals are supposed to be independent and immune from any administrative interference in the discharge of their judicial functions.
HIGH COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS
Powers and Jurisdictions
ORIGIN OF POWERS
After the coming into force of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , all judicial remedies save those of the Supreme Court under Ar...
... middle of paper ...
...ect appeals have been provided from the decisions of all Tribunals to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. In view of our above-mentioned observations, this situation will also stand modified. In the view that we have taken, no appeal from the decisions of a Tribunal will directly lie before the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution; but instead, the aggrieved party will be entitled to move the High Court under Article 226/ 227 of the Constitution and from the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court, the aggrieved party could move this court under Article 136 of the Constitution."
Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh High Court interpretation the Judgment in a bit different way and said that it applies to only the Tribunals made under the Article 323A and 323 B of Constitution of India. So All Tribunal may not follow the same Rule.
Ulrich, G. (1999). Widening the circle: Adapting traditional Indian dispute resolution methods to implement alternative dispute resolution and restorative justice in modern communities. Hamline Journal of Public Law and Policy. 20, (2), 419-452.
They must balance carrying out the law and keeping public opinion on the greener side. Legislative and Judicial work is just as important in the long run, but with the eyes of the nation on the executive branch at all times, it gains a slight edge in terms of importance in my
is one of the sole purposes of the Supreme Court of the United States. Many
The General Court. "General Laws." : CHAPTER 265, Section 37. 2014. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. .
R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd and others [1999] All ER (D) 1173.
The judges that are a part of this group has many different roles, some of which are to issues warrants, making a determination of probable cause in evidence, denying or granting bail to offenders, overseeing trials, making rulings on different motions and even overseeing hearings. The prosecuting attorney is the one who will represent that state in c...
The federal government and the state government have its own court system. Both the federal and state court system has a hierarchically organized system. Sec.1article III of the constitution created the supreme court of the United States. This paper will compare and contrast the court system of the federal and state government. This paper will also point out the hierarchically structure of them both.
Judiciary.gov.uk. 2014. Judges, Tribunals and Magistrates | Introduction to the justice system | Traditions of the courts. [online] Available at: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/introduction-to-justice-system/court-traditions [Accessed: 2 Apr 2014].
all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or may they act by representatives, freely and
a member of the judiciary such as a judge, the authority is not in the
The lay magistrates are not legally qualified but do a good job, as 1.
Legal Pluralism is the presence of various legal systems within a single country or a geographical area. Legal Pluralism is omnipresent although it is generally assumed to exist in countries only with a colonial past. This is because in most countries with a colonial past, colonial laws co-exist alongside indigenous laws. However, if we look at the expansive definition of legal pluralism, it can be said that every society or country if legally plural. The modern definition of legal pluralism also deals with the issues of relation between state and non-state legal orders. It shows the dichotomy that exists between customary legal norms and state law. The judiciary of India has upheld this principle of pluralism in many cases by showing that
The grounds of judicial review help judges uphold constitutional principles by, ensuring discretionary power of public bodies correspond with inter alia the rule of law. I will discuss the grounds of illegality, irrationality and proportionality in relation to examining what case law reveals about the purpose and effect these grounds.
The lack of automatic international compulsory jurisdiction renders ICJ inferior. Therefore the argument that referring to this court as the ‘World Court’ implies it is superior; an international equivalent of a national supreme court is null and void. Generally a supreme court is the highest ranking court. Its ruling is not subject to further review and therefore the disputing parties ha...
The judiciary should not only be impartial when dealing with cases but independent too. Whenever cases are being assessed, both impartiality and independence should go hand in hand to avoid