1993 (5) TMI 23 - SC - Central Excise

CEGAT - Appointment of President - Tribunals - Ineffectivity - Public interest legislation - Scope of

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legality and validity of the appointment of the President of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT).
2. The claim of privilege over certain documents by the Union of India.
3. Allegations of malfunctioning within the CEGAT.
4. The necessity to reassess the functioning of various tribunals in India.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality and Validity of the Appointment of the President of the CEGAT:
The judgment addresses the appointment of respondent No. 3 as the President of the CEGAT, which was challenged on the grounds of competence and adherence to established rules. The CEGAT Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1987, particularly Rule 10, allow the Central Government to appoint any member as the President. The Court noted that while the rules permit the appointment of a sitting or retired High Court judge as President, the current rules are not attractive enough for sitting judges due to the lack of extended tenure benefits. The Court recommended amending Rule 10(4) to make the position more appealing to sitting High Court judges. Despite allegations against respondent No. 3, the Court concluded that as long as the appointee meets the qualifications and eligibility criteria, the Court cannot interfere with the Central Government's choice.

2. Claim of Privilege Over Certain Documents:
The Union of India claimed privilege over certain documents related to the appointment process of the CEGAT President, invoking Sections 123 and 124 of the Evidence Act and Article 74(2) of the Constitution. The Court examined the claim of privilege, emphasizing that while the government has the right to claim privilege to protect public interest, the Court has the ultimate authority to decide on the matter. The Court agreed with the conclusion that it was unnecessary to disclose the contents of the records to the petitioner or his counsel, thus upholding the claim of privilege.

3. Allegations of Malfunctioning Within the CEGAT:
The Court addressed serious allegations of malfunctioning within the CEGAT, including delayed sittings, tendency to adjourn cases, and a general lack of work culture. The Court emphasized the need for the administrative machinery to take prompt action to investigate these allegations. It recommended appointing a high-level team to inspect the CEGAT, identify the causes of the crisis, and suggest remedial measures.

4. Necessity to Reassess the Functioning of Various Tribunals:
The Court highlighted the need to reassess the functioning of various tribunals established under Articles 323A and 323B of the Constitution. It stressed the importance of an independent and impartial justice delivery system and recommended that the Law Commission of India undertake a comprehensive study to suggest measures for improving the functioning of these tribunals. The Court also suggested that the CEGAT be brought under the control of the Law and Justice Department to ensure greater independence and efficiency.

Conclusion:
The writ petitions were disposed of with no order as to costs. The Court directed the Union Government to take immediate action to address the malfunctioning within the CEGAT and recommended amendments to the rules governing the appointment of its President. The Court also emphasized the need for a comprehensive review of the functioning of various tribunals by the Law Commission of India.