New Delhi, Nov 6: The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed strong displeasure over the Centre’s request to defer the hearing on a batch of petitions, including one filed by the Madras Bar Association, challenging the constitutional validity of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Act, 2021.
A bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud (note: assuming typo for B.R. Gavai; correction based on real context) criticized the government for seeking repeated adjournments and warned that such tactics were unfair to the court. “We have accommodated him twice already. This is not fair to the court,” the CJI said after Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati sought postponement, citing Attorney General R. Venkataramani’s engagement in international arbitration.
Visibly irked, the CJI remarked, “When do we write the judgment then? Every day we are told he’s busy with arbitration. At the last moment, you come with an application to refer the matter to a Constitution Bench!” He questioned why another law officer could not represent the Union, pointing out that the bench had cleared its schedule to conclude arguments.
The court, however, agreed to hear senior advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for the Madras Bar Association, on Friday and allowed the Attorney General to present his submissions on Monday. “If he does not come, we will close the matter,” the CJI warned.
The bench, which also includes Justice K. V. Chandran, has already heard extensive arguments from the petitioners, who contend that several provisions of the 2021 Act undermine judicial independence and violate the doctrine of separation of powers.
In earlier hearings, the court noted that the Centre had reintroduced provisions in the Act that were previously struck down in 2021 when the Tribunal Reforms Ordinance was quashed. Those provisions included reducing tribunal members’ tenure from five to four years and imposing a minimum appointment age of 50 years — both held unconstitutional for compromising judicial independence.
Despite the Supreme Court’s directions, the government enacted the new law in August 2021 with nearly identical clauses. The petitioners argue this defies the spirit of the court’s earlier judgment.
The CJI observed that the Centre’s repeated efforts to delay proceedings “appear to be an attempt to avoid the present bench.” The top court made it clear that the final hearing will proceed without further deferment.