HC notice to Centre on new rules for AFT appointments

PETITIONER ALSO AVERS

THAT THE TRIBUNAL CONTINUES TO BE PLACED UNDER DEFENCE MINISTRY AND HAS DEFENCE SECY AS PART OF THE SELECTION PANEL AGAINST THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE SC

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court has put Centre on notice on a plea challenging the new tribunal rules promulgated by the central government recently and an advertisement issued for appointment of administrative members in the Armed Forces Tribunals (AFT).

The high court bench of chief justice RS Jha and justice Arun Palli acted on the plea of Lieutenant Colonel SN Sharma (retd) who had filed this public interest litigation (PIL) submitting that the Supreme Court in November 2019 had struck down tribunal rules introduced by the central government in 2017 and had asked the government to reframe the rules in consonance with parent statutes governing tribunals and law laid down by the apex court earlier for ensuring independence of tribunals.

However, the new rules of 2020 carry out only cosmetic changes and continue with the control of the executive over tribunals, the court was told.

THE NEW ADVERT

The new advertisement issued for appointments in the Armed Forces Tribunal contravenes Section 6 of the AFT Act which only permits appointment of retired major generals and above as administrative members, while the new rules and advertisement make any person with experience in economics, management, commerce, industry etc eligible to be appointed, the court was told, adding that not only is this in contravention of the Act but also law laid down by a constitution bench of the apex court which has already ruled that such ‘ambiguous’ clauses cannot be introduced for appointments in tribunals.

Seeking response from the central government by August 20, the high court has also asked as to why the new rules should not be stayed, pending this petition before it.

The petition also avers that the Armed Forces Tribunal continues to be placed under the defence ministry and has the defence secretary as part of the selection committee which is against the law laid down by the apex court.

It was further alleged that multiple decisions by the Supreme Court for ensuring independence of tribunals have not been implemented by successive governments in letter and spirit leading to varied problems in their functioning and autonomy.