Terming the non-filling of vacancies in various tribunals as a “very regrettable” situation, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Center to apprise it of the steps taken within ten days and said it suspects that some lobbies are working in this regard. Huh. We need to know a clear stand on whether the Tribunal is to be continued or the Tribunal is closed. It appears that the bureaucracy does not want these tribunals, a bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justice Surya Kant said.
The top court was ready with all the details of pending vacancies in 15 quasi-judicial bodies such as Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), DRAT, Securities Appellate Tribunal, TDSAT, NCLT and NCLAT. The bench said that 19 posts of presiding officers or chairpersons in these tribunals are vacant and besides them 110 and 111 posts of judicial and technical members respectively, it cannot be allowed to continue. The bench said it may summon top officials to explain the reasons for not appointing people to these quasi-judicial bodies. We expect you to call and let us know within a week. Otherwise we are very serious, we are going to force top officials to appear and give reasons. Please do not invite such situation, the bench said.
The top court also issued notice on a PIL filed by lawyer and activist Amit Sahni in a hearing conducted through video conferencing, seeking constitution of National and Regional GST Tribunals. It was angered by the fact that the Appellate Tribunal provided under the Act on GST was not set up even after the law came into force almost four years ago. CGST Act came into force almost four years back, you have been unable to create any appellate tribunal.’ Ramana said that there are vacancies of judicial and technical members in the National Company Law Tribunal.
The CJI said that both he and Justice Surya Kant are members of the selection panel and had recommended the names in May 2020. The bench observed that there are many vacancies in AFT, NGT and Railway Claims Tribunal and no steps have been taken to fill these vacancies. And termed it as a very regrettable situation.
This is the situation in the Tribunal. We don’t know what the stand of the government is. The bench said that if they want to continue with these tribunals then you have to get a reply. “We have our doubts, some lobbies are working to not fill these vacancies,” it added.
The bench said appointments to these tribunals can be made subject to pending litigation, but the litigants cannot be left without remedy. If you don’t want the Tribunal let them go to the High Courts and if you want the Tribunal then fill the vacancies. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, sought some time to apprise the court on the matter and said there were some issues related to tenure and mode of appointment.
The bench said that tribunals are the creation of laws and they provide their own structure and procedures. It said the selection panel, which is mostly headed by judges of the apex court, has recommended names for appointments to the tribunals and several issues may be considered after the appointments.
One of the petitions related to the Centre’s decision to transfer and attach the jurisdiction of Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur to Debt Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow in the absence of availability of Presiding Officer at DRT Jabalpur. On this aspect, the Law Officer said that the DRT in Lucknow is also working in virtual mode.
Senior advocate Nidesh Gupta referred to the bills being discussed on the tribunal in Parliament and alleged that it was against the apex court’s decision on the issue. We cannot stop the government from passing the law and the government cannot stop us from passing the order…It is the duty of both the institutions, the bench said.
report
As per the apex court’s records, in the Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs), which were set up to recover bad loans of banks, 15 posts of presiding officers are vacant in the country and its appellate body, the DRAT, is not. President in Calcutta Branch. The report also indicated that in most cases, the selection panels have recommended names for appointments, but they have not been acted upon. There is a vacancy for a technical member in the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), it said, adding that the Appellate Tribunal for Confiscated Assets (ATFP) does not have a chairman and a technical member. Telecom Disputes and Settlement Appellate Tribunal [TDSAT] It said that while two technical members have to be appointed, the NCLT is short of one presiding officer, 19 judicial and 14 technical members respectively.
The appellate body, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), does not have a chairperson and each requires a judicial and technical member to act at its maximum power. While the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has to get three technical members, the Electricity Appellate Tribunal lacks one technical member.
Simultaneously, the Armed Forces Tribunal requires 13 judicial and ten technical members, adding that the National Green Tribunal currently has a shortfall of 14 judicial and 16 technical members. There are huge vacancies of 25 Judicial and 27 Technical Members in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
The information given by the top court states that at present, the Railway Claims Tribunal requires 20 judicial and 5 technical members. Sixteen technical members are to be appointed in the Central Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), saying the Central Administrative Tribunal has 18 judicial and 14 technical members less than the sanctioned strength. According to the report, the selection committee had recommended four names for two posts of members in TDSAT in August last year and similarly, the selection panel also recommended waiting list for the names of 11 judicial members and 10 technical members in May 2020. Had it. It also referred to similar recommendations made in respect of other tribunals for considering persons eligible for appointment.
read all Breaking Newshandjob breaking news And coronavirus news Here
.