SC to Law Commission - How effective is scheme of direct appeal from Tribunals to apex Court?
Published: Aug 25, 2016
By TIOLCORP News Service
NEW DELHI, AUG 25, 2016: THE Supreme Court has expressed serious concerns on the validity of scheme under which the High Court is bypassed without the alternative institutional mechanism i.e., Tribunals being equally effective for the access to justice. The matter was in the case of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd V. Essar Power Limited. Gujarat Urja Vikas had filed a petition before the State Electricity Commission for adjudication of the dispute arising out of the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). The appellant sought compensation for wrongful allocation of electricity by the Essar Power Limited (EPL) to its sister concern, Essar Steel Ltd. (ESL) in preference to the appellant. The Commission ruled in favour of the appellant but on appeal, the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity over-ruled the order.
When the matter was finally appealed before the Supreme Court, it held that the Tribunal committed gross errors in arriving at its conclusion and also misinterpreted the provisions of the PPA. While the Apex Court ruled in favour of the appellant, it raised questions on the scheme which allows direct appeal from Tribunals to the Supreme Court. The Court observed that while there may be no lack of legislative competence with the Parliament to make provision for direct appeal to the Supreme Court from orders of Tribunals but the legislative competence is not the only parameter of constitutionality.
The Supreme Court remarked that due to appeals from Tribunals coming directly to the highest court of the country on matters not involving public importance or constitutionality, the Court gets over burdened with routine matters in several judgments.
The apex court raised questions on the desirability of providing statutory appeals directly to this Court from orders of Tribunals on issues not affecting national or public interest and other aspects of statutory framework in respect of Tribunals. To address this situation, the supreme Court has framed the following questions and directed the Law Commission to submit a detailed report within a year from the date of this order.
Question 1
Whether any changes in the statutory framework constituting various Tribunals with regard to persons appointed, manner of appointment, duration of appointment, etc. is necessary in the light of judgment of this Court in Madras Bar Association or on any other consideration from the point of view of strengthening the rule of law?
Question 2
Whether it is permissible and advisable to provide appeals routinely to this Court only on a question of law or substantial question of law which is not of national or public importance without affecting the constitutional role assigned to the Supreme Court having regard to the desirability of decision being rendered within reasonable time?
Question 3
Whether direct statutory appeals to the Supreme Court bypassing the High Courts from the orders of Tribunal affects access to justice to litigants in remote areas of the country?
Question 4
Whether it is desirable to exclude jurisdiction of all courts in absence of equally effective alternative mechanism for access to justice at grass root level as has been done in provisions of TDSAT Act (Sections 14 and 15).
