ORISSA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATION versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

Citation: [2023] 6 S.C.R. 731 · Decided: 21-03-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 13 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
731
   [2023] 6 S.C.R. 731
731
ORISSA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATION
v.
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No 6805 of 2022)
MARCH 21, 2023
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, CJI AND
HIMA KOHLI, JJ.]
Constitution of India:
Art. 226 – Odisha Administrative Tribunal-OAT – Abolition
of, by Notification No. GSR 552(E) dt 2 August 2019 – Constitutional
Validity of the Notification – Held: Abolition of OAT is constitutionally
valid – Challenge to the constitutional validity of the impugned
notification dated 2 August 2019 by which the OAT was abolished
is rejected - Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 – s. 4(2) – General
Clauses Act, 1897 – s. 21.
Article 226 – Odisha Administrative Tribunal-OAT – Abolition
of – Writ petition before the Orissa High Court alleging violation of
constitutional rights by abolition of OAT – Maintainability of – Held:
Writ petitioners entitled to invoke jurisdiction of the High Court u/
Art. 226.
Arts. 323A and 323B – Administrative Tribunal –
Establishment of State Administrative Tribunals-SAT by the Union
Government, if mandatory u/Art. 323-A - Held: Word ‘may’ in Art.
323-A is not imparted with the character of the word ‘shall’ – Art.
323-A does not preclude the Union Government from abolishing
SATs – Art. 323-A is a directory, enabling provision which confers
the Union Government with the discretion to establish an
administrative tribunal – Art. 323-A does not act as a bar to the
Union Government abolishing an administrative tribunal once it is
created – Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
Art. 14 – Notification dated 2.8. 2019 by which Odisha
Administrative Tribunal-OAT was abolished – If arbitrary and thus,
violative of Art. 14 – Held : Notification dated 2.08.2019 by which
the OAT was abolished is not violative of Art. 14 – State Government
did not consider any irrelevant or extraneous factors while arriving
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
732
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 6 S.C.R.
at the decision to request the Union Government to abolish the OAT
– Decision to abolish the OAT is itself not absurd or so unreasonable
that no reasonable person would have taken it – Administrative
Tribunals Act, 1985.
Art. 14 – Abolition of the Odisha Administrative Tribunal-
OAT, if violative of the fundamental right of access to justice –
Held : Abolition of the OAT not violative of the fundamental right
of access to justice – Orissa High Court will hear cases which were
pending before the OAT prior to its abolition – Administrative
Tribunals Act, 1985.
Art. 14 – Abolition of Odisha Administrative Tribunal-OAT –
Plea that Union and State Governments violated the principle of
natural justice by failing to provide the OAT Bar Association and
litigants before the OAT with an opportunity to be heard before
abolishing the OAT – Held: Principles of natural justice not violated
– Class of people who were affected by the decision to abolish the
OAT did not have a right to be heard – Public at large (or some
sections of it) did not have a right to be heard before the policy
decision was taken – Principles of natural justice – Administrative
Tribunals Act,1985.
Art. 77 – Notification dated 2.08.2019 abolishing OAT – Not
expressed in the name of the President of India – Validity of – Held:
Notification dated 2.08.2019 is valid though it is not expressed in
the name of the President of India – Non-compliance with Art.77
does not invalidate a notification or render it unconstitutional –
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
Administrative Tribunals Act,1985:
Establishment of Odisha Administrative Tribunal-OAT – Union
Government if rendered functus officio after establishing the OAT
– Held: Union Government did not become functus officio after
establishing the OAT – Doctrine of functus officio cannot ordinarily
be applied in cases where the government is formulating and
implementing a policy.
Establishment of Odisha Administrative Tribunal-OAT – Plea
that State Government took advantage of its own wrong by ceasing
to fill the vacancies in the OAT – Held: State Government did not
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
733
take advantage of its own wrong – It stopped filling the vacancies
of the OAT only after deciding to abolish it – It did not rely on the
vacancies (and the consequent increase in pendency) created by its
inaction to abolish the OAT.
Odisha Administrative Tribunal-OAT – Judicial impact
assessment – Conduct of before abolishing the OAT - Failure by the
Union Government, if vitiates its decision to abolish the OAT – Held:
Fai

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.