UPSC MainsPSYCHOLOGY-PAPER-II202210 Marks150 Words
Q3.

All tribunals are courts, but all courts are not tribunals. Explain.

How to Approach

This question requires a clear understanding of the constitutional basis of courts and tribunals in India. The answer should begin by defining both terms – courts and tribunals – highlighting their origins and powers. It should then explain why all tribunals are established by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature and function under the purview of courts, thus being a subset of courts. Conversely, all courts are not tribunals because courts possess inherent powers and wider jurisdictions not granted to tribunals. A comparative analysis of their powers, establishment, and judicial review will be crucial.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

The Indian legal system comprises both Courts and Tribunals, often leading to confusion regarding their relationship. Both are adjudicatory bodies, but they differ significantly in their establishment, powers, and functions. The Constitution of India provides for the establishment of both. While Courts are established under the Constitution, Tribunals are statutory bodies created by Acts of Parliament or State Legislatures. The statement "All tribunals are courts, but all courts are not tribunals" encapsulates this hierarchical relationship, stemming from the fundamental differences in their origins and scope of authority. This answer will delve into these distinctions to explain the validity of this assertion.

Defining Courts and Tribunals

Courts: Courts are permanent institutions established by the Constitution (Articles 124-147 for Supreme Court, 214-237 for High Courts) and governed by constitutional provisions. They possess inherent powers like judicial review, contempt of court, and the power to interpret laws. They deal with a wide range of cases – civil, criminal, constitutional – and their decisions set precedents.

Tribunals: Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies established by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature for resolving specific disputes. They are not constitutionally established and derive their powers from the enabling legislation. They are designed to provide speedy and efficient redressal in specialized areas like taxation, labour, environment, and consumer protection.

Why All Tribunals are Courts

The assertion that all tribunals are courts stems from the fact that tribunals exercise judicial functions. They adjudicate disputes, apply legal principles, and issue binding orders.

  • Judicial Function: Tribunals perform a judicial function, resolving disputes based on law.
  • Statutory Basis: They are created by statutes, and their powers are defined within those statutes.
  • Supervision by Courts: The decisions of tribunals are subject to judicial review by High Courts and the Supreme Court under Article 226 and 32 of the Constitution respectively. This oversight establishes a hierarchical relationship where tribunals operate within the larger framework of the court system.
  • Example: The National Green Tribunal (NGT) established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, exercises judicial powers related to environmental protection. Its orders are subject to judicial review by the Supreme Court.

Why All Courts are Not Tribunals

Conversely, not all courts are tribunals because courts possess inherent powers and broader jurisdictions that tribunals lack.

  • Constitutional Basis: Courts are established by the Constitution itself, granting them inherent powers not available to tribunals.
  • Wider Jurisdiction: Courts have a wider jurisdiction, dealing with a broader range of cases, including constitutional matters, writ petitions, and appeals from lower courts.
  • Inherent Powers: Courts possess inherent powers like the power of judicial review (to strike down laws), contempt of court, and the power to administer justice according to principles of natural justice. Tribunals generally lack these inherent powers.
  • Precedent Setting: Decisions of higher courts (Supreme Court and High Courts) set precedents that are binding on lower courts and tribunals. Tribunal decisions, while persuasive, do not necessarily have the same binding effect.

Comparative Analysis

Feature Courts Tribunals
Establishment By the Constitution By an Act of Parliament/State Legislature
Jurisdiction Wide and comprehensive Specific and limited
Powers Inherent powers (judicial review, contempt) Derived from enabling legislation
Judicial Review Exercises judicial review Subject to judicial review by High Courts/Supreme Court
Precedent Decisions are binding precedents Decisions are persuasive, not necessarily binding

Conclusion

In conclusion, the statement "All tribunals are courts, but all courts are not tribunals" accurately reflects the hierarchical relationship and functional differences between these two adjudicatory bodies. Tribunals, while exercising judicial functions, are statutory creations operating under the supervision of courts. Courts, established by the Constitution, possess inherent powers and broader jurisdictions that distinguish them from tribunals. Understanding this distinction is crucial for comprehending the structure and functioning of the Indian legal system and ensuring effective access to justice.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Judicial Review
The power of the courts to examine the constitutional validity of legislative acts and executive orders.
Quasi-Judicial
Having a power similar to that of a court, but not a court of law. Often involves administrative bodies making decisions based on evidence.

Key Statistics

As of 2023, India has over 50 tribunals functioning across various sectors (Source: PRS Legislative Research, as of knowledge cutoff).

Source: PRS Legislative Research

Pendency of cases in Indian courts exceeds 4.8 crore as of January 2024 (Source: National Judicial Data Grid, as of knowledge cutoff).

Source: National Judicial Data Grid

Examples

Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)

Established under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, CAT adjudicates disputes related to service matters of government employees. Its decisions are subject to judicial review by the High Courts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the purpose of establishing tribunals?

Tribunals are established to reduce the burden on courts, provide speedy and efficient redressal of grievances in specialized areas, and promote expertise in specific fields.

Topics Covered

PolityLawConstitutional LawJudicial SystemAdministrative Law