JavaScript is not available.

The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up the Union government over the long-pending vacancies in tribunals across the country, stating that while it does not want any confrontation, its patience is running out on delay in filling up the vacancies. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice L Nageswara Rao said that in the backdrop of long-pending vacancies, the tribunals across the country are on "the verge of collapse," some are only working with one-member, and cases are being adjourned by a year. 

The bench told Mehta to convince the government to fill long-pending vacancies at tribunals by next hearing on September 13. If orders are not implemented, the top court said it has following options: Stay the Tribunal Reforms Act, close down tribunals, the top court appoints the people to fill up vacancies and initiate contempt of court proceedings. Concluding the hearing, the Chief Justice stressed that the court expects some appointments to be made by Monday.

At the beginning of the hearing, when Mehta asked for adjournment in the matter, the chief justice, denying adjournment, said: "You have no respect for the judgments of this court. You are testing our patience."

Mehta shared a screenshot of a letter addressed to him by the finance ministry on September 6. The ministry said the rules under Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 are in the process of being finalized and will soon be notified. "The new law has paved the way for filling up vacancies in the tribunals... The government will ensure that within next two weeks, a decision on appointment to all the tribunals is taken where the Search-cum-Selection Committees have already given their recommendations to the government,” said the letter.

However, the contents of the letters did not budge the bench, which rather shot a volley of questions at Mehta, while making critical observations on the Act. Justice Rao questioned the assurance in the ministry's letter regarding filling up of vacancies in the tribunals. He asked Mehta: "The appointments have been pending for over a year-and-a-half. Why were these appointments not made?" 

Justice Chandrachud said the new Act is the replica of what was struck down in the Madras Bar Association cases. The bench said: "Next time we issue a judgement there will be a new law contrary to the judgement. It's a replica!" Justice Chandrachud noted that the names for appointments were cleared by the Intelligence Bureau and then by a committee which included top court judges and senior-level bureaucrats. "No clarity, why are they deleted? We sat together with bureaucrats and made decisions. It is a waste of energy," said Justice Chandrachud. Justice Rao said if appointments were not made then tribunals would have to be closed. “You are emasculating the tribunals by not making the appointments,” said the bench.

The bench asked Mehta to engage with the government on the issue of appointments. Mehta said that he will convey it to the government. The bench told Mehta, "No, no 'conveying' is something else. If you don't want an order from us, you pass the order of appointments."

The top court also issued notices on several fresh pleas including the one filed by Congress leader Jairam Ramesh challenging the Constitutional validity of various provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, which was passed during the recent Monsoon Session of Parliament and received Presidential assent on August 13. Ramesh said he has filed the petition in public interest assailing the provison to Section 3(1) along with Sections 3(7), 5 and 7(1) of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 as being ultra-vires Articles 14, 21 and 50 of the Constitution.

The top court on August 16 had termed "serious" the passage of Bill on tribunals with the provisions, that were struck down earlier, without any debate in Parliament. The court had then granted 10 days to the Centre to make appointments to the tribunals.

The bench had given details of pending vacancies in 15 quasi-judicial bodies such as Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs), DRAT, Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and National Companies Law Appellate Tribunal or NCLAT. 

There are 19 vacant positions of presiding officers or the chairman in these tribunals, besides 110 and 111 posts of judicial and technical members respectively lying vacant, the bench had said.