SC approves Centre's proposal extending term of tribunal members; govt coming up with new bill

New Delhi, Mar 9 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday approved a proposal of the Centre extending the term of chairpersons and members of various tribunals in the country and are due to retire soon, till September 8.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi approved the proposal after Attorney General R Venkataramani said that the Union government was mulling bringing in a new tribunal bill related to their functioning and appointments of their members either in the ongoing Budget session or the Monsoon session of Parliament.

He submitted that currently, deliberations are going on at various levels of the government. To avoid any confusion or problem in the functioning of tribunals, it has been decided to give an extension of tenure to all members who are set to retire in the interregnum till September 8 of this year.

"The Government is working on a proposal. A bill is being contemplated. We don't want any interruption in the meantime.

"Everybody who was appointed under the Tribunal Reforms Act of 2021 will continue. By next September, either this Budget session or the Monsoon session, a new law is likely to be enacted," the AG said, adding that about 21 members are due to retire in the meantime.

In November 2025, the top court had struck down the provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 on appointment and tenure of tribunal members, for being violative of its earlier judgments on the issue.

Venkataramani said that the new bill will be in accordance with last year's verdict and smoothen the functioning and appointments of members in various tribunals.

CJI Kant once again flagged the lack of accountability of tribunals and said they should be responsible to some authority.

"They are not accountable to the government and they are not accountable to us. Who is going to evaluate their integrity and performance? "Instead of granting extension alone by a sweeping order, we have to consider their accountability. To whom are they accountable? There should be some mechanism. If their work is not upto the mark, why should their tenure be at all extended?," the CJI said.

Senior advocate Sanjay Jain, appearing for the CAT Bar Association, said that the Madras Bar Association judgment of last year mandated a minimum tenure of five years for the members and around 31 members are set to superannuate soon.

He said that another concern is that administrative members are allowed to act as acting chairperson of the tribunal when the judicial members superannuate.

CJI Kant said this concern was shared by the bench earlier in another matter related to the functioning of tribunals.

"There should be a comprehensive law which fixes accountability of members of tribunals. You can't keep tribunals under government control, since there will be criticism.

"You can't keep them under judicial control also. Then where?" CJI said.

Jain submitted that the issue of whether administrative members can at all preside over the bench was also arising in some cases before the court.

The CJI said, "Why not every bench of the tribunal, when they reserve the judgment, confidentially inform the president or the chairperson that this matter has been reserved and judgment has been entrusted to so and so members. Somebody should know who is going to write the judgment and how much time will be taken." The top court said it will post the matter of hearing in May to review the progress.

On February 26, expressing serious displeasure over the functioning of tribunals in the country, the top court said they have become a "liability" and "mess" without any "accountability" and flagged that technical members of a financial tribunal were even "outsourcing writing of judgement".

It had been observed that tribunals are "creations of the government" and are functioning like "no-man's land" without any accountability to anyone.

The top court was hearing a plea for the extension of tenure of tribunal members, including chairpersons, in the wake of last year's verdict which struck down the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021.

Asking the Attorney General to make some arrangement for urgent filling of vacancies, the bench had flagged that according to the present regime, a technical member of the TDSAT tribunal becomes an acting chairperson of the quasi-judicial body upon superannuation of the incumbent chairperson.

The top court asked the AG to ensure that there are no functional crises in such important tribunals as it frowned upon the regime where a technical member will occupy the post of chairperson.

In November 2025, the top court had struck down the provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 on appointment and tenure of tribunal members, for being violative of its earlier judgments on the issue. PTI MNL SJK MNL KSS KSS