Administrative Tribunal and Court – A Comparative Analysis

Research paper TOPIC: Administrative Tribunal and Court – A Comparative Analysis.

AUTHOR: Aney Verma a Student of Symbiosis Law School, Noida.




Page No.



Jurisdiction and Function

4, 5, 6, 7

Purpose and Objective

8, 9, 10, 11


12, 13

Procedure and Mechanism

14, 15

Appeal and Review 

16, 17,18

Advantages and Disadvantages



23, 24




In the labyrinthine panorama of India’s felony system, administrative disputes and questions of public interest find decisions in one-of-a-kind yet interconnected domains: the administrative tribunals and the traditional courts. While each institution is designed to dispense justice and uphold justice, it possesses precise characteristics, features, and scopes that warrant a comparative exploration. This has a look at endeavours to delve into the area of administrative justice in India, scrutinizing the executive tribunals and courts and examining the intricacies that set them aside, as well as the synergies that bind them together. 

The comparative analysis between administrative tribunals and courts is pivotal in comprehending their complementary roles within the legal landscape. While administrative tribunals convey specialization and knowledge to the table, owning individuals nicely versed in administrative law, public management, and applicable fields, the courts wield the authority of constitutional guardianship, safeguarding the state’s fundamental standards. The structure, jurisdiction, and powers of these establishments contribute to their precise attributes and effectiveness in resolving disputes and ensuring justice for the Indian population.

In the following exploration, we will scrutinize the essential characteristics of administrative tribunals and courts, assessing their attributes and examining the ramifications of their coexistence. Furthermore, this evaluation will delve into the performance, independence, and effect of these institutions in the pursuit of administrative justice. 


  1. Structure and Hierarchy.

The courtroom machine in India follows a structured hierarchy, with the Supreme Court at the top. It is the highest judicial authority and hears appeals from the High Courts and decreased courts. Each country has its very own supreme court, and these courts have original and appellate jurisdictions. Below the High Courts are the District Courts, Sessions Courts, and Magistrate Courts, which cope with civil and crook instances at the neighbourhood degree. Additionally, specialised courts and tribunals address particular areas of regulation, such as the circle of relatives disputes, patron grievances, labour matters, and environmental problems. The doctrine of priority guarantees that decisions of better courts are binding on decreased courts, ensuring uniformity in the interpretation and application of the regulation.

  1. General jurisdiction.

The courts in India have popular jurisdiction divided into civil and crook categories. The Supreme Court has authentic, appellate, and advisory powers in civil subjects, even as the High Courts have unique and appellate jurisdiction over both civil and criminal cases. Sessions Courts take care of severe criminal offences, and Magistrate Courts deal with petty criminal cases and certain civil subjects. Both the Supreme Court and High Courts can hear appeals from decreased courts and feature the authority to issue writs to shield fundamental rights. Additionally, specialised courts and tribunals cope with particular regions of law to provide know-how and expedite dispute decisions.

  1. Scope and case heard.

Indian courts have a wide scope, hearing civil, criminal, constitutional, and administrative instances. They cope with disputes associated with property, contracts, family matters, and tort claims. Criminal instances contain severe offences, robbery, cybercrimes, and drug-related offences. Constitutional matters deal with violations of essential rights and disputes among the middle and states. Administrative cases contain judicial review and employment disputes. Specialized courts handle highbrow property, environmental problems, and taxation matters. India’s legal system has diverse levels of courts, with cases appealed to better courts primarily based on complexity. Specialized tribunals expedite decisions in unique areas.

  1. Establishment and legal framework.

The administrative and prison framework of administrative tribunals in India is governed by the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985. These tribunals are mounted at each valuable and state level to adjudicate disputes related to the recruitment and conditions of provider of government employees. They are composed of experts in administrative regulation and public management. The tribunals have extraordinary jurisdiction over carrier subjects and exercise quasi-judicial powers, granting alleviation to aggrieved events. Their decisions can be challenged through judicial evaluation in the High Court or Supreme Court. The establishment of administrative tribunals objectives to provide specialised and green decisions of administrative disputes, ensuring a fair and powerful gadget of administrative justice.

  1. Limited jurisdiction.

Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 mentions its jurisdiction. Administrative tribunals in India have restricted jurisdiction, that specialize in carrier-related disputes of administration. They no longer have widespread jurisdiction like civil and crook courts. Their exclusivity means carrier matters need to be delivered earlier than them instead of ordinary courts. Armed forces are excluded from their jurisdiction. Appeals against their orders are confined to the respective High Courts or the Supreme Court. They no longer have advisory jurisdiction. The confined scope ensures efficient resolution of administrative subjects and specialized administrative justice.

  1. Specialized area of law.

Administrative tribunals in India manage specialised regions of regulation, presenting know-how in specific topics. They cope with carrier-related disputes of government personnel, employment and exertions law troubles, taxation disputes, intellectual belongings rights, environmental matters, immigration, opposition law, banking, schooling, purchaser safety, and land acquisition instances. The jurisdiction of every tribunal varies primarily based on the unique legal guidelines that establish them.


  1. Uphold the rule of law.

Article 13 of the Indian Constitution states that the courts have the obligation to uphold the rule of law, and to fulfil this obligation; courts use work independently, remain unbiased and follow the procedure set by law. They provide judicial evaluation, guard essential rights, and treat all people similarly. Courts put into effect contracts to resolve disputes. They are entitled to costs for contempt of court and offer an appeals manner for assessment. Through those mechanisms, Indian courts ensure a simple and fair legal system by using defensive rights, selling justice and upholding the ideas of democratic and constitutional government.

  1. Interpretation of the constitution.

The Supreme Court being the supreme authority, the Indian courts interpret and apply the Constitution. They conduct judicial reviews and analyse legal guidelines and motions for constitutionality. Courts use concrete and holistic definitions, seeking uniformity and adapting to changing circumstances. Fundamental rights are protected, and their choices create a binding precedent. Judicial administration ensures the application of constitutional considerations. The judiciary upholds the rule of law, protects rights, ensures the stability of government institutions, and ensures the supremacy of the Constitution in India.

  1. Protection of individual rights.

Courts in India have judicial review power to check the constitutional validity of an act. Article 32 and Article 226 of the Indian Constitution allow the Supreme Court and High Court to issue writs, enforce the fundamental rights of individuals, PIL, etc, and a few ways in which the court protects individual rights. The court recognizes the gender equality and accessibility of justice to every individual. The court’s commitment to upholding individual rights helps strengthen the democracy of India.

  1. Alternative Dispute Resolution. 

Administrative tribunals in India use Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques to expedite the decision of positive instances. They rent mediation and conciliation to inspire events to reach together ideal answers. Settlement and compromise options are explored, and in a few instances, disputes can be cited in Lok Adalat’s decision. It is carried out in cases in which parties are open to negotiation and in which the nature of the dispute permits alternative resolution methods. By integrating ADR, the administrative tribunal’s purpose is to enhance performance and decrease backlogs whilst making sure of fairness and upholding the rule of law. Some administrative tribunals have final decision power, which allows no other court of tribune to change the original decision. 

  1. Reduce the burden on courts. 

Administrative tribunals in India reduce the load on regular courts by means of handling particular administrative subjects and carrier-associated disputes.  Due to expertise in specialised fields, administrative tribunals provide speedy justice, and administrative tribunals are also granted quasi-judicial authority. They Limited appellate jurisdiction and encouragement of mediation additionally expedite the manner. Administrative tribunals emphasise administrative issues only, which allows traditional courts to have high motivation to concentrate on civil and criminal matters. Hence, it will lead to an overall increase in the efficiency of the Indian judicial system.


  1. Appointment of judges and their legal qualification.

In India, judges for the Supreme Court are appointed under Article 124(4) and High Courts are appointed under Article 217(1) by the President based on recommendations from the Collegium system. The Chief Justice of India and senior judges play a massive position in making that appointment. Judges of the Supreme Court must have preceded High Court experience or distinguished legal information, whilst High Court judges want at least ten years of criminal practice or prominent jurist status. The manner pursues to make sure certified and impartial judges are appointed to uphold justice. 

  1. Judicial acumen.

The Indian courts exhibit strong judicial acumen because of their exceptionally certified and independent judges. The court’s intention is for quick resolutions and undertaking generation to beautify efficiency. The courts adapt with time, and this makes them relevant to date. 

  1. Appointments, Composition and qualification of members.

Section 4 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 mentions the description of the tribunal. Section 6 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, provides qualifications for the appointment of members. The administrative tribunal is headed by the Chairman. He must have been a judge of the High Court, worked as Vice Chairman for 2 years, and worked as the secretary for the government of India. Vice Chairman, he shall work as a High Court judge, work as a Secretary for the government for 2 years, and work as an additional secretary for 5 years. Judicial members must work as High Court judges members of Indian legal service for 3 years with a grade I post. Administrative members shall work as Additional Secretaries for 2 years for the government of India working as Joint Secretary. 

The President appointed the Chairman and Vice Chairman at the central level. With the consultation of the Chief Justice of India, the President appoints the judicial member. On the state level, the President appointed the Chairman and Vice Chairman with the consultation of the Governor of that State. 


  1. Procedure followed. 

The courts in India observe the processes laid down inside the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Cases are initiated via written lawsuits or petitions, and the court issues summons or notices to the events. Pleadings and proof are exchanged, observed by using the very last arguments. The court gives a judgment or verdict primarily based on the evidence and felony principles. Dissatisfied parties can enchantment to higher courts. Courts might also encourage mediation and opportunity dispute decisions. Technology, like e-filing and virtual hearings, is more and more used for efficiency and accessibility.

  1. The procedure followed.

Section 22 of the Administrative Tribune Act, 1985, mentions the procedure of the Administrative Tribunal. A tribunal is not sure to observe the technique laid down by using the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It has the energy to modify its personal method; however, it should abide by the principle of natural justice. Expert opinions can be sought for specialised matters. The tribunal delivers its very last selection, which is typically binding but can be appealed in higher courts. The system targets performance, specialized resolution of administrative disputes, and adherence to criminal principles. Time-bound proceedings may additionally be observed in a few cases.


  1. Petition and appeal.

In the Indian judicial device, there are provisions for appeals and evaluation mechanisms. Parties dissatisfied with lower courtroom choices can enchanter to better courts in both civil and crook cases. Special Leave Petition (SLP) permits attraction to the Supreme Court whilst no additional appeal is allowed by way of law. Review petitions can be filed in the identical court to seek a re-examination of the judgment based on constrained grounds. Curative petitions are available inside the Supreme Court as a last motel for correcting gross miscarriages of justice.

  1. Ground of appeal.

In Indian courts, grounds of appeal are felonies and authentic motives offered through a celebration to venture a decreased court’s selection. They may additionally consist of mistakes of law or fact, procedural irregularities, admissibility of proof, misinterpretation of documents, violation of fundamental rights, incorrect utility of precedents, jurisdictional troubles, and, in criminal cases, the appropriateness of the sentence. The grounds must be nicely supported with logical arguments and proof inside the appeal petition filed earlier than the better court docket.


Article 226 of the Indian Constitution empowers High Courts to trouble Writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other motive. Individuals aggrieved with the aid of administrative tribunal decisions can file Writ Petitions inside the High Courts difficult those decisions. The Writ Petitions may be based totally on numerous grounds, including errors of law or truth, violation of natural justice, loss of jurisdiction, or extra jurisdiction by way of the tribunal. The High Court may additionally trouble one-of-a-kind kinds of Writs, along with Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus, and Quo Warranto, to provide remedies. The scope of judicial overview ensures that administrative tribunals’ choices are lawful and cling to criminal standards. It is normally required to exhaust all available treatments within the tribunal before drawing close the High Court, except in positive cases.


Under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court has discretionary power to supply Special Leave to Appeal (SLP) towards judgments of any court or tribunal, consisting of administrative tribunals. Parties searching for enchantment record an SLP, and the Court decides whether to supply it based on the deserves and significance of the case. The grounds for granting or refusing SLP are not defined, allowing the Court to focus on cases of public significance or grave injustice. The Supreme Court’s choice in an SLP is commonly final and binding at the events. Article 136 empowers the Supreme Court because the last courtroom of attraction, ensuring justice in cases of national or criminal importance.




  1. Impartial Adjudication: Courts in India are impartial and independent establishments that provide an honest and neutral forum for resolving disputes. Merits play a key role in the decision-making of courts.
  2. Rule of Law: Courts uphold the rule of law and ensure that every individual, such as the government, is problem to the identical set of laws and rules. 
  3. Appellate System: The hierarchical structure of courts permits the appeal of choices, making sure that parties have an opportunity for redressal and correction of errors made via lower courts.
  4. Legal Precedents: Indian courts observe the doctrine of binding precedent, which means that selections of higher courts serve as a manual for lower courts.
  5. Access to Justice: Courts provide the right of entry to justice for all residents, regardless of their social or monetary fame.


  1. Backlog of Cases: Indian courts face a big backlog of cases, leading to delays in the resolution of disputes. The backlog of cases will eventually increase frustration and reduce confidence in courts.
  2. Lengthy Litigation: The criminal process in India can be time-consuming and high-priced, mainly in complex cases. Prolonged litigation can cause economic strain and psychological stress for events worried. 
  3. Burden on Judiciary: The high quantity of cases and constrained judicial resources can put tremendous pressure on the judiciary, affecting the performance and satisfaction of case adjudication.
  4. Costly Litigation: The value of felony illustration and courtroom charges may be prohibitive for lots of individuals proscribing their admission to justice.
  5. Complex Legal Procedures: Legal approaches and technicalities may be challenging for laypersons to navigate, leading to a dependence on prison specialists and making the prison method less available for the overall public.


  1. Specialized Expertise: Administrative tribunals are composed of individuals with specialised knowledge and know-how in particular areas of regulation or administration. This guarantees knowledgeable and expert adjudication of instances associated with the one’s regions.
  2. Quick Resolution: Administrative tribunals are designed to provide quicker decisions in disputes compared to everyday courts. This expeditious procedure is especially useful in carrier-associated topics, wherein timely resolution is critical.
  3. Reduced Backlog: By taking up precise classes of cases, administrative tribunals help decrease the load on regular courts, which can have a tremendous backlog of instances. 
  4. Informality and Accessibility: Administrative tribunals adopt a much less formal and technical method as compared to standard courts. Parties can regularly present their instances without felony representation, making it greater on hand to the general public.
  5. Cost-Effective: The streamlined strategies and simplified procedures of administrative tribunals can lead to reduced litigation charges for the parties concerned.


  1. Limited Scope: Administrative tribunals have restricted authority, and because of this, some cases that are probably related to the difficulty depend on but fall outside their purview are excluded from their attention.
  2. Lack of Appeal: While administrative tribunals provide brief decisions, the absence of an instantaneous attraction to better courts can sometimes be a drawback, as parties might not have recourse to similar assessments of choices.
  3. Administrative Control: Administrative tribunals are mounted and managed through the govt department of the government. This may want to improve concerns approximately independence and impartiality, particularly whilst adjudicating disputes related to government entities.
  4. Delay in Establishment: In some instances, there are probably delays in putting in administrative tribunals, resulting in cases continuing to be heard in ordinary courts, which defeats the purpose of their rapid decision.
  5. Limited public awareness: Many human beings may not be aware of the lifestyles and functioning of administrative tribunals, leading to underutilization of this alternative dispute decision mechanism.


Courts and administration tribunals both have their merits and demerits. They contribute to the Indian judicial system in their own way. Administrative tribunal work in a specific administration dispute. They provide a faster decision of instances inside their domain because of streamlined strategies and a cantered consciousness. However, their jurisdiction is confined to the exact concern count number, constraining their scope of authority.

In assessment, normal courts, along with the High Courts and the Supreme Court, own a greater jurisdiction, allowing them to adjudicate a wide range of cases encompassing civil, criminal, and constitutional topics.

While their professionally installed appellate gadget allows for a hierarchical overview of judgments, it could bring about a backlog of pending cases, main to delays in meting out justice. Both boards are dedicated to ensuring access to justice. However, administrative tribunals may face challenges in terms of independence, as they’re installed and ruled via the executive department of the authorities.

This connection may additionally increase apprehensions concerning ability bias while instances involve authorities’ entities. A balanced method is essential to maximise the benefits provided by each court and administrative tribunals.

Leveraging the specialised expertise and efficiency of tribunals in precise areas whilst addressing worries of independence can contribute to an extra effective and equitable dispute decision framework. Simultaneously, efforts to alleviate the backlog and beautify accessibility in ordinary courts can sell a fair and efficient justice gadget for the residents of India.


The Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, § 14, No. 13, Acts of Parliament, 1949 (India)

 The Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, § 14, No. 13, Acts of Parliament, 1949 (India)


 INDIAN CONST. art. 32

INDIAN CONST. art. 226

 INDIAN CONST. art. 124 cl. 4

INDIAN CONST. art. 217 cl.1

The Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, § 4, No. 13, Acts of Parliament, 1949 (India)

The Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, § 6, No. 13, Acts of Parliament, 1949 (India)

The Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, § 22, No. 13, Acts of Parliament, 1949 (India)

INDIAN CONST. art. 226

INDIAN CONST. art. 136

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *