Tribunals as the First Remedy

In one line

For a very large class of disputes the first court is not a court at all, and after 1997 the High Court sits above it rather than instead of it.

In the wording a student can write in an exam: an administrative tribunal is the court of first instance for the disputes assigned to it, and a person aggrieved must apply to it before invoking the writ jurisdiction; sections 19 to 22 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 govern the application, the exhaustion of departmental remedies, limitation and procedure, and after L. Chandra Kumar the tribunal's decision is subject to scrutiny by a Division Bench of the High Court.

The sections that govern an application

Section 19. A person aggrieved by an order pertaining to a service matter may make an application to the Tribunal, in the prescribed form, with the prescribed fee.

Section 20. The Tribunal shall not ordinarily admit an application unless it is satisfied that the applicant has availed of all the remedies available under the relevant service rules. A person is deemed to have done so where a final order has been made rejecting his appeal or representation, or where no final order has been made and six months have expired since the appeal was preferred or the representation made. A memorial to the President or the Governor is not one of the remedies which are available unless the applicant has elected to submit it.

Section 21. The Tribunal shall not admit an application unless it is made within one year of the final order, or within one year of the expiry of the six months where no final order has been made; and there is provision for admitting an application after that period on sufficient cause.

Section 22. The Tribunal is not bound by the Code of Civil Procedure but is guided by the principles of natural justice, has power to regulate its own procedure including the fixing of places and times of hearing, and has the powers of a civil court in respect of summoning and examining witnesses, requiring the discovery and production of documents, receiving evidence on affidavit, issuing commissions and reviewing its decisions.

Why section 22 matters to this paper

Because it is a statutory adoption of everything in Module III. A tribunal freed from the Code is not freed from fairness: it must give notice, disclose the material, hear the applicant and give reasons, and a failure is both a breach of natural justice and a breach of section 22.

What survives of the tribunal after L. Chandra Kumar

L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 1125, worked in [Tribunals, Article 323A and L. Chandra Kumar], holds that the tribunals remain courts of first instance in their fields and that litigants must go to them first, but that their decisions are subject to scrutiny before a Division Bench of the High Court within whose jurisdiction the tribunal falls, and that no appeal lies directly to the Supreme Court under Article 136 from a tribunal.