9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (12) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1976 inserted Part XIV-A in the Constitution which contains Articles 323-A and 323-B. These Articles conceive of setting up of various tribunals as adjudicatory bodies. They, inter alia, contain provisions which enable, not only the Parliament but even State Legislatures, to exclude the jurisdiction of all courts except that of this Court under Article 136 with respect to matters falling within the jurisdiction of the concerned tribunals. The Act came to be enacted by the Parliament in exercise of the power conferred on it by Article 323-A of the Constitution. The vires of the Act was challenged before this Court which was upheld in Sampath Kumar s case. 3. While upholding the validity of Section 28 of the Act in Sampath Kumar s case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, it shall be competent for the Chairman or any other Member authorised by the Chairman in this behalf to function as a Bench consisting of a single Member and exercise the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Tribunal in respect of such classes of cases or such matters pertaining to such classes of cases as the Chairman may be general or special order specify: Provided that if at any stage of the hearing of any such case or matter it appears to the Chairman or such Member that the case or matter is of such a nature that it ought to be heard by a Bench consisting of two Members the case or matter may be transferred by the Chairman or, as the case may be, referred to him far transfer to, such Bench as the Chairman may deem fit. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Rama Jois, in assailing the validity of subsection (6), has raised larger issues before us one of which relate to the view taken in Sampath Kumar s case that judicial power need not always be exercised by regular courts. According to the learned counsel, this is contrary to the dicta laid down even in Kesvananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461. Indeed, this is the view which has been taken recently by a Full Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Sakinala Harinath v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1994 (1) APLJ 1. For the sake of completeness it may be mentioned that the decision in Sakinala has been assailed before this Court in C.A. No. 169/94 which has been referred to a Constitution Bench. 8. Another facet of the case foc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
