Context: The Supreme Court recently expressed its discontentment over the functioning of tribunals in the country, given that several of these important quasi-judicial bodies are understaffed.

• The SC asked the government if it intends to shut down tribunals that have several key vacant posts.
• The Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2021 was introduced in Lok Sabha by Finance Minister and was passed on August 3.

Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2021

• The Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2021 replaces a similar Ordinance promulgated in April 2021 that sought to dissolve eight tribunals.
• They are functioned as appellate bodies to hear disputes under various statutes, and transferred their functions to existing judicial forums such as a civil court or a High Court.
• The Chairpersons and Members of the tribunal being abolished shall cease to hold office, and they will be entitled to claim compensation equivalent to three months’ pay and allowances for their premature termination.
• It also proposes changes in the process of appointment of certain other tribunals.

What are these changes?

• While the Bill provides for uniform pay and rules for the search and selection committees across tribunals, it also provides for removal of tribunal members.

It states that the central government shall remove from office any Chairperson or a Member, who –

• Has been adjudged as an insolvent; or
• Has been convicted of an offence which involves moral turpitude; or
• Has become physically or mentally incapable of acting as such Chairperson or Member; or
• Has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as such Chairperson or Member; or
• Has so abused his position as to render his continuance in office prejudicial to the public interest.

These are based on the recommendation of the Search-cum-Selection Committee,

• In the Search-cum-Selection Committee for state tribunals, the Bill brings in the Chief Secretary of the state and the Chairman of the Public Service Commission of the concerned state who will have a vote and Secretary or Principal Secretary of the state’s General Administrative Department with no voting right.
• This gives the government a foot in the door in the process. The Chief Justice of the High Court, who would head the committee, will not have a casting vote.

What happens to cases pending before the tribunals dissolved?

• These cases will be transferred to High Courts or commercial civil courts immediately.
• Legal experts have been divided on the efficacy of the government’s move.
• The cases might get a faster hearing and disposal if taken to High Courts, experts fear that the lack of specialisation in regular courts could be detrimental to the decision-making process.
• For example, the FCAT exclusively heard decisions appealing against decisions of the censor board, which requires expertise in art and cinema.