Guwahati: The Supreme Court on Monday approved the Centre's proposal to extend the tenure of chairpersons and members of various tribunals who are due to retire soon, allowing them to continue in office until September 8.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi granted approval after Attorney General R. Venkataramani informed the court that the Union government is considering bringing a new law governing the functioning and appointments of tribunal members. The proposed legislation may be introduced either during the ongoing Budget session or the upcoming Monsoon session of Parliament.
The Attorney General told the court that deliberations on the proposed bill are underway at different levels within the government. To prevent disruption in the functioning of tribunals in the interim, the Centre has decided to extend the tenure of members who are scheduled to retire before September 8.
He said that all members appointed under the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 would continue until then, adding that around 21 members are expected to retire during this period. The proposed legislation, he said, would align with the Supreme Court's ruling last year that struck down certain provisions of the 2021 law concerning the appointment and tenure of tribunal members.
In November 2025, the Supreme Court had invalidated those provisions for being inconsistent with its earlier judgments on the independence and functioning of tribunals.
During the hearing, Chief Justice Kant raised concerns about the lack of accountability in the functioning of tribunals, observing that they currently do not answer to any authority.
"They are not accountable to the government and they are not accountable to us. Who is going to evaluate their integrity and performance?" the Chief Justice asked. He noted that instead of granting blanket extensions, the court must also examine mechanisms to ensure accountability and performance evaluation.
Senior advocate Sanjay Jain, appearing for the Central Administrative Tribunal Bar Association, pointed out that the Madras Bar Association judgment delivered last year mandated a minimum tenure of five years for tribunal members. He said around 31 members are set to retire soon and flagged concerns about administrative members being allowed to serve as acting chairpersons when judicial members superannuate.
The Bench acknowledged that the issue had been raised earlier as well and emphasised the need for a comprehensive law addressing the structure, functioning and accountability of tribunals.
"You cannot keep tribunals under government control because there will be criticism. You cannot keep them under judicial control either. Then where?" the Chief Justice observed, stressing the need for an independent accountability mechanism.
Jain also informed the court that questions have arisen in certain cases regarding whether administrative members should be permitted to preside over tribunal benches.
The Chief Justice suggested procedural measures to ensure transparency in tribunal functioning. He proposed that whenever a tribunal bench reserves judgment, it should confidentially inform the president or chairperson about the case and identify the member responsible for writing the judgment, along with an estimated timeline.
The court said it would take up the matter again in May to review the progress made on the proposed legislation and other related issues.
Earlier, on February 26, the Supreme Court had expressed strong displeasure over the functioning of tribunals in the country, describing them as a "liability" and a "mess" in the absence of accountability. The court had also raised concerns about reports that technical members of a financial tribunal were outsourcing the writing of judgments.
The observations were made while hearing a plea seeking extension of tenure for tribunal members following the 2025 judgment that struck down key provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021. The court had then directed the Attorney General to ensure that vacancies in tribunals are filled urgently to prevent disruption in their functioning.
The Bench also flagged concerns over the existing arrangement in which a technical member of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) assumes charge as acting chairperson when the incumbent chairperson retires, stating that such situations could affect the functioning of important quasi-judicial bodies.