2008 (8) TMI 1001 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved: Constitution of Tribunal u/s 60 of the Act, validity of impugned award, mandatory vs. directory nature of provisions

Constitution of Tribunal u/s 60 of the Act:
The judgment addressed the issue of the constitution of the Tribunal under Section 60 of the Act. It was argued that the impugned award was not valid as the Tribunal was not properly constituted, citing a precedent from the Apex Court. The judgment clarified that under the Act, the Tribunal is considered a Court, with each member entitled to have their own opinion. The composition of the Tribunal, including the mandatory quorum of three members, was emphasized. The Tribunal's decision must be unanimous or based on the majority view, with the President not having sole authority. The judgment distinguished a Privy Council's ruling on the directory nature of statutes, affirming that the Tribunal's functions are quasi-judicial and imperative.

Validity of impugned award:
The judgment found that the impugned award needed to be set aside due to the Tribunal's coram non-judice, as the provisions of Section 60 of the Act were deemed mandatory. Unlike a previous Privy Council judgment, the Tribunal's three-member composition for determining compensation was considered essential, making any disregard of this requirement render the adjudication void and inoperative.

Mandatory vs. directory nature of provisions:
The judgment highlighted the difference in views between the Privy Council and the Apex Court regarding the mandatory nature of statutory provisions. It emphasized that the Tribunal's functions, including determining compensation, are quasi-judicial and cannot be considered merely directory. Despite potential inconvenience or delay, adherence to the mandatory provisions was deemed necessary to uphold the purpose of the Act.

In conclusion, the impugned award was set aside, and the cases were remitted for fresh consideration by a properly constituted Tribunal as per Section 60 of the Act. The State Government was directed to establish such a Tribunal within two months, with a mandate to resolve all matters within four months thereafter.