Centre wants to avoid my bench, says CJI Gavai after govt seeks larger constitution bench

CJI Gavai is demitting office on November 23.

The Supreme Court has taken strong note of the Centre’s application seeking a direction to refer to a larger bench the pleas challenging the provisions of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Act, 2021, saying that it did not expect this from the government at the fag end of the final hearing.

The 2021 Act abolishes certain appellate tribunals, including the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal, and amends various terms related to the appointment and tenure of judicial and other members of various tribunals.

A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Viond Chandran, which has already heard final arguments on behalf of petitioners, including lead petitioner Madras Bar Association, in the matter, was irked over the fact that the Centre now wanted the matter to be referred to a five-judge .

“On the last date (of hearing), you (attorney general) did not raise these objections and you sought adjournment on personal grounds. You cannot raise these objections after hearing them fully on merits… we do not expect the Union to indulge in such tactics.

"This is after we have heard one party fully and accommodated the Attorney General on personal grounds,” said the visibly irked CJI.

The CJI observed that it seems the Centre wanted to avoid the present bench. CJI Gavai is demitting office on November 23.

Attorney General R Venkataramani urged the bench not to misunderstand the Centre’s application seeking adjudication by a larger bench and said that the preliminary objections on this aspect were already part of the reply filed by the Union government earlier.

“If we reject this application by you, we will observe that the Union is trying to avoid this bench. We will not hear all this now after we have heard one side on merits,” the CJI said.

“No, please do not get this impression. The Act was passed after due deliberations... we are only saying that should the Act be just struck down because of these issues. Let it get some time to be stabilised,” the attorney general said.

Justice Chandran said the issue of referring the matter to a larger bench was not raised earlier and the same cannot be done at such a belated stage. “At least at some stage you should have raised this issue… that too an application for this? You took an adjournment because you wanted to come and argue,” the bench observed.

When the attorney general tried hard to dispel the notion that the Centre wanted to defer the hearing, the CJI said, “We have the highest regard and respect for you. You (AG) please confine yourself to respond to the submissions made by (Arvind) Datar (the senior advocate who argued against the law)."

The attorney general commenced final arguments in the case. He said the government, in its wisdom, came out with a law after a long gestation period and the statute be allowed to work to gain experience.

“The court should not set aside the law,” the top law officer said and referred to the provisions of the law with regard to minimum term and prerequisites for appointments in various tribunals"

"Merit cannot be sacrificed for selections to take place from the waitlist,” he said.

The hearing would resume on Friday. The top court, on October 16, commenced the final hearing on the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Act.

(With PTI inputs)