Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

69. In S.P. Sampath Kumar (4supra), the constitutionality of the Administrative Tribunals Act (Act No. 13 of 1985) fell for consideration before the Supreme Court. Bhagavathi, C.J., and Ranganatha Misra, J., (as he then was) delivered two separate but concurring judgments. Chief Justice Bhagavatthi reiterated the earlier view expressed by him in Minerva Mills (6 supra) about the power of Parliament to set up effective alternative institutional mechanisms or arrangements for judicial review by amending the Constitution. If, by such a constitutional amendment, the power of judicial review of the High Court is taken away and vested "in any other institutional mechanism or authority, it would not be violative of the basic structure doctrine, so long as the essential condition is fulfilled viz., that the alternative institutional mechanism or authority set up by Parliamentary amendment is no less effective than the High Court". The learned Chief Justice said mat as questions involving interpretation of Articles 14,15,16 and 311 arise for decision, it is necessary that "those who adjudicate upon these questions should have some modicum of legal training and judicial experience". In that view, he agreed with Ranganatha Misra, J., about the invalidity of Clause (c) of Section 6(1) of the Act which prescribed qualifications for the office of Chairman of the Tribunal - at least two years experience as Secretary to the Government of India or any other post under the Central or State Government carrying the scale of pay which is not less than that of the Secretary to Government of India. The appointment of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman and administrative members should be made, in the opinion of the learned Chief Justice, only after consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the recommendations of the Chief Justice of India, ordinarily, be accepted unless there are cogent reasons for not accepting the same. Another suggestion was made that District Judge or an advocate who is qualified to be a Judge of the High Court should be regarded as eligible for being the Vice-Chairman of the Administrative Tribunal and if, to such an effect amendment was not carried out, the impugned Act would have to be declared to be invalid" since it cannot be severed from the other provisions.