SC Strikes Down Key Provisions of Tribunals Reforms Act 2021

Case Details: Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India (2025) 36 Centax 340 (S.C.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• B.R. Gavai, CJI & K. Vinod Chandran, J.
• S/Shri Arvind P Datar and C.S. Vaidyanathan, Sr. Advocates, Rahul Unnikrishnan, Naveen Hegde, Siddharth Vasudev, Ms Gayatri Gulati and Brahma Prakash Soni, Advocates and Mr Nikunj Dayal, Advocates & T.V.S. Raghavendra Sreyas and Pramod Dayal, AOR, for the Petitioner.
• S/Shri K.M. Nataraj and Mrs Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G., Dr. K. Shivaram, B.M. Chatterji, Gagan Gupta, P.S. Patwalia, Porus F. Kaka, Pradeep Kumar Rai, Rupesh Kumar and Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Advocates, Dr. Prince Mohan Sinha, Dr. Vijay Kumar Sharma, Mr Aayush Saklani, Mr Aditya Archiya, Mr Aditya Kumar, Mr Ajay Singh, Mr Alekshendra Sharma, Mr Anuj Srinivas Udupa, Mr Arkaj Kumar, Mr Bhuvan Kapoor, Mr Dushyant Pratap Singh, Mr K. Gopal, Mr K.M. Abish, Mr Kartik Seth, Mr Khushagra, Mr Lakshmikant Srirvastava, Mr Manish Kant, Mr Manoj Kumar Mishra, Mr Mohan Singh, Mr Naman Tandon, Mr Narveer Yadav, Mr Ninad Laud, Mr Paras Chauhan, Mr Paras Savla, Mr Parimal Rai, Mr Raghav Sharma, Mr Rahul Hakani, Mr Rajat Nair, Mr Rajeev Kumar Deora, Mr S. Subramaniam, Mr Shakti Singh, Mr Sharath Nambiar, Mr Shiv Nath Bind, Mr Shreyansh Singh, Mr Shreyash Shah, Mr Shubhankar Singh, Mr Sughosh Subramanyam, Mr Sujeet Kumar Chaubey, Mr Vatsal Joshi, Mr Vinay Kumar Rai, Mr Vinayak Sharma, Mr Vineet Bhagat, Mr Virendra Singh, Mr Yogya Rajpurohit, Mr Zubin Dash, Mrs Rajshree Rai, Ms Anusha Rathor, Ms Chitransh Sharma, Ms Farhat Naim, Ms Indira Bhakar, Ms Modoyia Kayina, Ms Nikita Capoor, Ms Pankhuri Shrivastava, Ms Ritika Ranjan, Ms Satvika Thakur, Ms Shilpa Saini and Ms Tanvi Dubey, Advocates, Dr. Vivek Sharma, Dr. N. Visakamurthy, M/s Chambers of Kartik Seth, M/s R and R Law Associates, Mr Archit Upadhayay, Mr Bhagabati Prasad Padhy, Mr Gurmeet Singh Makker, Mr Jasmeet Singh, AOR Intervenor-in-person, Mr K.S. Rana, Mr Mahesh Thakur, Mr Manish Paliwal, Ms Neelam Sharma, Mr Raj Bahadur Yadav, Mr Sandeep Kumar Jha, Mr Siddharth Sangal, Mrs Vipasha Singh, Ms Disha Jham, Ms Garima Bajaj, Ms Pallavi Langar, Ms Radhika Gautam, Ms Sakshi Kakkar, AORs, for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, asserting that key provisions regarding appointments, tenure, qualifications, and service conditions of Tribunal Members and Chairpersons were unconstitutional. It was contended that the Act violated fundamental principles of separation of powers and judicial independence. It was submitted that transitional provisions and appointment rules in undermined independence of Tribunals and failed to cure defects highlighted in earlier judgments. The matter was accordingly placed before the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court held that the challenged provisions were unconstitutional as they violated the principles of separation of powers, judicial independence, and binding judicial pronouncements. The Court directed that, until Parliament enacts an appropriate legislation curing these defects, the principles and directions laid down in Madras Bar Association would continue to govern appointments, qualifications, tenure, and service conditions of Tribunal Members and Chairpersons. All appointments made before the Act came into force but notified afterward shall be protected under the parent statutes and existing judicial directions.

List of Cases Cited

• Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India — 2023 SCC Online SC 813 — Relied on [Para 119]
• His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala — (1973) 4 SCC 225 — Relied on [Para 112]
• K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India — (2017) 10 SCC 1 — Noted [Para 131]
• Kalpana Mehta v. Union of India — (2018) 7 SCC 1 — Relied on [Para 113]
• Kudrat Sandhu v. Union of India — 2018 (359) E.L.T. 625 (S.C.) = 2018 (10) G.S.T.L. 130 (S.C.) — Noted [Paras 92, 144]
• L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India — 1997 (92) E.L.T. 318 (S.C.) — Noted [Paras 27, 43]
• M. Nagaraj v. Union of India — (2006) 8 SCC 212 — Noted [Para 130]
• Madras Bar Association v. Union of India — (2015) 8 SCC 583 — Relied on [Paras 46, 104]
• Madras Bar Association v. Union of India — 2014 (308) E.L.T. 209 (S.C.) — Relied on [Paras 42, 106]
• Madras Bar Association v. Union of India — 2020 (374) E.L.T. 817 (S.C.) — Relied on [Paras 61, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 96, 99, 106]
• Madras Bar Association v. Union of India — 2021 (377) E.L.T. 305 (S.C.) — Relied on [Paras 82, 106]
• Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India — (1980) 3 SCC 625 — Relied on [Para 115]
• NHPC Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh — 2023 INSC 810 — Relied on [Para 118]
• Powers, Privileges and Immunities of State Legislatures — 1964 SCC Online SC 21 — Relied on [Para 111]
• R.K. Jain v. Union of India — 1993 (65) E.L.T. 305 (S.C.) — Noted [Para 26]
• Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Ltd. — 2019 (369) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) — Relied on [Paras 52, 60, 67, 76, 77, 96, 106, 147]
• S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India — 1987 (27) E.L.T. 1 (S.C.) — Relied on [Paras 19, 27, 127]
• S.R. Bhagwat v. State of Mysore — (1995) 6 SCC 16 — Noted [Para 92]
• State of Rajasthan v. Union of India — (1977) 3 SCC 592 — Relied on [Para 112]
• Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India — (2015) 5 SCC 808 — Noted [Para 55]
• Union of India v. R. Gandhi — 2010 (261) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) — Relied on [Paras 31, 33, 43, 46, 47, 48, 82, 106, ]
• Virender Singh Hooda v. State of Haryana — (2004) 12 SCC 588 — Noted [Para 92]