SC again pulls up govt over tribunal vacancies

NEW DELHI: The Union government should not lecture the judiciary on the sufferings of the common man when people have been rendered remediless on account of non-functional tribunals, the Supreme Court said on Friday, venting its anguish at delays in filling up vacancies in tribunals across the country.

A bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh further warned the Centre that the top court would consider suspending all proceedings under the pertinent laws before each and every such tribunal that cannot function due to shortage of members.

“If you (Centre) are not going to appoint the members in the tribunals, we will direct all proceedings shall be stayed in all the tribunals. Why should we keep bothering and burdening the high courts when you cannot appoint people for two years or more?” the bench asked ASG Vikramjeet Banerjee.

The court recorded in its order that it cannot keep the high courts troubled with cases “when the government seems to be unconcerned with the consequences” of not appointing members in the tribunals.

The ASG was representing the Centre in a case relating to violations of foreign exchange laws when the court questioned him over the defunct Fema Appellate Tribunal. On April 29, the bench took note that the Foreign Exchange Management Act Appellate Tribunal was nonfunctional for the last two years due to unfilled vacancies, leading the parties to file writ petitions before the high courts to seek relief.

Seeking response from Centre, the bench observed at the time that till the tribunal vacancies are filled, proceedings across the board should be kept in abeyance to obviate the possibility of the high courts being flooded with related issues.

ASG Banerjee appeared on behalf of the Centre but requested for some time to return with appropriate instructions.

At the same time, the law officer urged the court not to issue any order of stay in favour of the petitioner, PC Financial Services, a non-banking financial company which was aggrieved by an order passed against it under Fema. But the bench was livid. “When you don’t want to appoint people then we will have to grant a stay on such proceedings. We will not allow the high courts to keep getting flooded. You cannot do this... You cannot make judicial remedies unavailable to litigants and then come here to argue that stay should not be granted.”

Don’t give us lecture on interest of common man... If people are suffering today, that is a direct consequence of your actions.

THE SC BENCH