2018 (2) TMI 1569 - SC - Indian Laws

Selection process of Tribunals - it was claimed that substantial steps have taken place in the selection process for the Central Administrative Tribunal and it is desirable that appointments be made expeditiously - Search-cum-Selection Committees (SCSC) - Held that - In all cases where the CJI has nominated the Chairperson of the SCSC for making recommendations for appointment of Chairperson/President/Presiding Officer of any tribunal and the Committee has begun its work by holding a meeting, the process will continue on the basis of the terms and conditions and eligibility stated in the advertisement issued or, as the case may be, as notified on the directions of the SCSC for ascertaining expression of interest. All recommendations made or to be made by any SCSC as referred to above for appointment of Chairperson and/or members shall be processed further.

Issues Involved:
1. Composition and functioning of the Search-cum-Selection Committee (SCSC).
2. Terms of office and conditions of service for tribunal members.
3. Status of the selection process for various tribunals.
4. Interim directions for ongoing selection processes.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Composition and Functioning of the Search-cum-Selection Committee (SCSC):
The Court initially stayed the composition of the SCSC as prescribed in the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal, and Other Authorities Rules, 2017. An interim SCSC was constituted with the Chief Justice of India or his nominee as Chairman, the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal as a member, and two Secretaries nominated by the Government of India as members. This interim committee was to oversee the selection of both Judicial and Administrative members.

2. Terms of Office and Conditions of Service for Tribunal Members:
The Court stayed the prescribed term of office of 3 years and directed that the term for all selectees by the interim SCSC should be fixed at 5 years. The conditions of service for these appointments were to be equivalent to those applicable to High Court Judges. However, the Attorney General suggested modifications, proposing that the conditions of service should adhere to the old Acts and Rules, and the term of office should be as provided in those old Acts and Rules. The Court accepted these modifications.

3. Status of the Selection Process for Various Tribunals:
The Court reviewed the status of the selection process for 19 tribunals based on a tabular chart submitted by the Attorney General. The chart detailed whether the SCSC had been constituted, whether advertisements had been issued, applications received, shortlisting or interviews conducted, and whether appointments had been made.

Specific Tribunals:
- CESTAT: The selection process was substantially completed with interviews conducted and the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet approving the proposal. The process was allowed to continue unaffected by the interim order.
- DRT and DRAT: The selection process was completed, and appointments were made, allowing the process to proceed unaffected.
- CAT: The selection process for judicial members was advanced with shortlisting completed. This process was allowed to continue, while the process for administrative members was to follow the interim directions.
- NCLAT: The existing selection committee's composition matched the new rules, allowing the process to continue unaffected.
- NCDRC: The selection process for judicial and non-judicial members was substantially completed, and the process was allowed to proceed. The appointment of the President required a nomination by the CJI.
- AAR: A fresh nomination was needed from the CJI after the nominated candidate passed away.
- APTEL: The selection process initiated by the SCSC was allowed to proceed.

4. Interim Directions for Ongoing Selection Processes:
The Court clarified that all ongoing selection processes initiated by the SCSC before the interim order would continue unaffected. This included processes for tribunals like the Armed Forces Tribunal, where the selection committee's composition under the old and new rules was the same. The Court directed that all recommendations made by any SCSC for appointments should proceed without being affected by the interim order dated 9 February 2018.

Conclusion:
The Court's judgment provided a detailed framework for the interim functioning of the SCSC, terms of office, and conditions of service for tribunal members. It ensured that ongoing selection processes for various tribunals could continue without disruption, while also adhering to the modifications suggested by the Attorney General regarding the terms of service and tenure of tribunal members.

← Previous Next →