New Delhi, March 9 The Supreme Court on Monday approved a proposal by the Centre to extend the terms of chairpersons and members of various tribunals in the country, many of whom are due to retire soon, until September 8.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi approved the proposal after Attorney General R Venkataramani said that the Union government was considering introducing a new tribunal bill related to their functioning and the appointment of their members, either during the ongoing Budget session or the Monsoon session of Parliament.
He stated that deliberations are currently underway at various levels of the government. To avoid any confusion or problems in the functioning of tribunals, it has been decided to grant an extension to all members who are set to retire in the interim period until September 8 of this year.
"The government is working on a proposal. A bill is being considered. We don't want any interruption in the meantime.
"All those appointed under the Tribunal Reforms Act of 2021 will continue. By next September, either this Budget session or the Monsoon session, a new law is likely to be enacted," the AG said, adding that about 21 members are due to retire in the meantime.
In November 2025, the top court had struck down the provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 on the appointment and tenure of tribunal members, deeming them to be in violation of its earlier judgments on the issue.
Venkataramani said that the new bill will be in accordance with last year's verdict and will smooth the functioning and appointments of members in various tribunals.
CJI Kant once again highlighted the lack of accountability of tribunals and emphasized that they should be responsible to some authority.
"They are not accountable to the government, and they are not accountable to us. Who will evaluate their integrity and performance?
"Instead of simply granting extensions, we need to consider their accountability. To whom are they accountable? There should be some mechanism. If their work is not up to the mark, why should their tenure be extended?" the CJI said.
Senior advocate Sanjay Jain, appearing for the CAT Bar Association, said that the Madras Bar Association's judgment last year mandated a minimum tenure of five years for the members, and around 31 members are due to retire soon.
He further stated that another concern is that administrative members are allowed to act as acting chairpersons of the tribunal when the judicial members retire.
CJI Kant said that this concern had also been raised by the bench in another matter related to the functioning of tribunals.
"There should be a comprehensive law that fixes the accountability of tribunal members. You cannot keep tribunals under government control, as there will be criticism.
"You cannot keep them under judicial control either. Then where?" the CJI said.
Jain submitted that the issue of whether administrative members can preside over the bench was also being raised in some cases before the court.
The CJI said, "Why not every bench of the tribunal, when they reserve the judgment, confidentially inform the president or the chairperson that this matter has been reserved and the judgment has been entrusted to so and so members. Somebody should know who is going to write the judgment and how much time will be taken."
The Supreme Court said that it will post the matter for hearing in May to review the progress.
On February 26, expressing serious displeasure over the functioning of tribunals in the country, the Supreme Court said they have become a "liability" and a "mess" without any "accountability" and flagged that technical members of a financial tribunal were even "outsourcing the writing of judgments".
It had been observed that tribunals are "creations of the government" and are functioning like "no-man's land" without any accountability to anyone.
The Supreme Court was hearing a plea for the extension of tenure of tribunal members, including chairpersons, in the wake of last year's verdict which struck down the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021.
Asking the Attorney General to make some arrangements for the urgent filling of vacancies, the bench had flagged that according to the present regime, a technical member of the TDSAT tribunal becomes an acting chairperson of the quasi-judicial body upon the superannuation of the incumbent chairperson.
The Supreme Court asked the AG to ensure that there are no functional crises in such important tribunals as it frowned upon the regime where a technical member will occupy the post of chairperson.
In November 2025, the top court had struck down the provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 on the appointment and tenure of tribunal members, deeming them to be in violation of its earlier judgments on the issue.