Supreme Court approves Centre’s proposal extending term of tribunal members

The Supreme Court on Monday approved a proposal by the Center to extend the tenure of presidents and members of various courts in the country, who are expected to retire soon by September 8.

After Solicitor General R Venkataramani said that the Union government was considering introducing a new tribunal bill regarding its functioning and appointment of its members in the ongoing Budget session or the Monsoon session of Parliament, a Bench of Chief Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi approved the proposal.

He noted that negotiations are currently ongoing at various levels of government. In order to avoid any confusion or problems in the functioning of the courts, it was decided to extend the term of office of all members who were planned to retire during the interregnum until September 8 of this year.

“The government is working on a proposal. A bill is being worked on. In the meantime, we do not want any interruptions.

“All those appointed under the Court Reforms Act, 2021 will continue in office. A new law is likely to come into force by next September, be it in this Budget session or the Monsoon session,” the AG said, adding that around 21 members will retire in the meantime.

In November 2025, the high court had annulled the provisions of the Court Reforms Act 2021 regarding the appointment and tenure of court members, on the grounds that it violated its previous decisions on the matter.

Mr. Venkataramani said the new bill will be in line with last year’s decision and will facilitate the functioning and appointment of members in various courts.

CJI Kant once again drew attention to the accountability of the courts and said that the courts should be accountable to some authorities.

“They are not accountable to the government and they are not accountable to us. Who will evaluate their integrity and performance? “We must consider their accountability, rather than just granting an extension with a blanket order. To whom are they responsible? There must be a mechanism. If their work is not up to the mark, why should their tenure be extended,” the CJI said.

Senior advocate Sanjay Jain, speaking on behalf of the CAT Bar Association, said that the Madras Bar Association’s decision last year mandated a minimum tenure of five years for members and around 31 members will retire soon.

Another concern, he said, is allowing administrative members to serve as acting presidents of the court when members of the judiciary come out of retirement.

CJI Kant said this concern was shared by the bench earlier on another issue related to the functioning of the courts.

“There should be a comprehensive law governing the accountability of court members. You cannot keep the courts under the control of the government, because there will be criticism.

“You cannot keep them under judicial control either. So where are they?” The CJI said.

Jain stated that in some cases before the court, the issue of whether administrative members can preside over the bench has also come up.

The CJI said: “Why doesn’t every bench of the court, while reserving the verdict, secretly inform the chairman or president that the matter is reserved and the verdict has been given to so-and-so member. Someone has to know who will write the verdict and how much time it will take.” The high court said it would release the matter for the hearing in May to review progress.

On February 26, expressing serious displeasure with the functioning of the country’s courts, the top court said the courts had become a “liability” and a “mess” without any “accountability” and pointed out that technical members of a fiscal court were “outsourcing decision writing”.

It was observed that the courts were “the creation of the government” and operated as a “no-man’s land” without being accountable to anyone.

The high court was hearing a plea seeking to extend the terms of office of court members, including presidents, following last year’s ruling striking down the Court Reforms Act, 2021.

Asking the Attorney General to make some arrangements for urgent filling of vacant positions, the delegation pointed out that under the current regime, a technical member of the TDSAT tribunal becomes the acting chairman of the quasi-judicial body upon the retirement of the incumbent chairman.

The apex court asked the AG to ensure that there was no functional crisis in such important courts as it did not welcome the regime where a technical member would assume the chairmanship.

It was published – 10 March 2026 08:41 IST