Question

Q. Which of the following statements is correct regarding Tribunals in India?

• A. An aggrieved public servant can directly approach the Supreme court against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal.
• B. Tribunals related to the election of Parliament and State Legislatures can be established only by Parliament.
• C. The Chairman of Joint Administrative Tribunals can be appointed by the President with the consultation of the Governor of concerned states.
• D. Central Administrative Tribunal and State Administrative Tribunal exercises exclusive jurisdiction in relation to recruitment and all services matter at Centre and State level.

Answer 1

The correct option is C The Chairman of Joint Administrative Tribunals can be appointed by the President with the consultation of the Governor of concerned states.

Explanation:

Option a is incorrect: The Supreme Court in the Chandra Kumar case clarified that the judgements of tribunals can be challenged in the High court. Hence, Any aggrieved public servant can directly approach the high court (not the Supreme court) against the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal.

Option b is incorrect: Article 323 B of the Constitution empowers both the Parliament and State Legislatures to provide for the establishment of tribunals for adjudication of disputes related to the election of Parliament and State Legislatures.

Option c is correct: Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 provides for Joint Administrative Tribunals. The chairman and members of JAT are appointed by the President after consultation with the governors of the concerned states.

Option d is incorrect: CAT and SAT enjoy original (and not exclusive) jurisdiction in relation to recruitment and all services matter at the Centre and State level.