Tribunals were meant to reduce the burden on courts but have themselves become victims of vacancies and executive control. Discuss in light of recent reforms.

Tribunals were created under Articles 323A and 323B (42nd Amendment, 1976). They were meant to take specialised disputes on tax, service, company and environment matters off the courts and decide them faster. Over time, empty posts and government control over who sits on them have weakened that purpose.

Why tribunals were created

• Expert benches with judicial and technical members to decide technical disputes.
• Lighter load on courts, faster rulings in high-value commercial cases, and a better investment climate.

Victims of vacancies

• Slow, case-by-case recruitment left benches empty and cases piling up.
• Short terms made this worse. The 2021 framework kept a four-year term and a minimum age of 50, even though the SC had already struck both down [3].

Victims of executive control

• Under the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, the Central Government controlled appointments and service conditions [4].
• The 2021 Rules made the government the authority that grants leave to chairpersons. The SC had said the executive should have no administrative role over members [3].
• Provisions struck down in the 2021 Ordinance were passed again in the Act. In Madras Bar Association (Nov 2025), the SC struck them down again and ordered a National Tribunals Commission (NTC) within four months [2].

Recent reforms

• The Tribunal Reforms Act, 2026 repeals the 2021 Act and sets up a judiciary-led NTC. It has a chairperson who is a former SC Judge or HC Chief Justice, plus 2 judicial and 2 technical members [4].
• The NTC also maintains a National Tribunals Data Grid [4].
• The 2026 Rules cover 16 tribunals. They require recruitment to begin six months before a vacancy arises and set up a formal misconduct-inquiry mechanism [5].

Gaps that remain

• The government still appoints the NTC. It also has three months to act on a recommendation, which lets it delay names it dislikes [1].
• Reappointment depends on how past work is rated, and member terms end at age 67. Both can make members cautious about ruling against the government [1].

The 2026 framework has moved appointments from the government to judges. Two further steps would finish the job: treat the committee's recommendation as final if the government misses its deadline, and give the NTC full control over administration. Publishing vacancy data on the Data Grid would also show whether the six-month rule is followed. Together, these would protect the separation of powers and access to justice.