Why in news?

Parliament passed the Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026 — introduced in Lok Sabha on August 10, 2026, and passed by both Houses within two days.

The Bill repeals the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, and seeks to restructure tribunal governance in line with Supreme Court directions, ending a near-decade-long confrontation between the judiciary and the executive.

Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies set up to provide swift, specialised resolution of disputes and to reduce the caseload of regular courts.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Background: A Decade of Government-Judiciary Conflict
• The Supreme Court's 2025 Verdict
• Key Provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026
• Does the Bill Fully Insulate Tribunals from the Executive?
• Conclusion

Background: A Decade of Government-Judiciary Conflict

• 2017: The Finance Act empowered the Centre to frame rules governing tribunal appointments and service conditions.
• 2019: In the Rojer Mathew case, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court struck down these rules for undermining judicial independence.
• 2020: When the Centre notified fresh rules, the Supreme Court suggested modifications, including a five-year tenure for members.
• 2021: Instead of accepting these suggestions, the Centre promulgated an Ordinance fixing tenure at four years, setting a minimum appointment age of 50, and requiring selection committees to give the government a panel of two names to choose from.
• After the Supreme Court struck down these provisions as arbitrary, Parliament re-enacted the same provisions through the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 — effectively overriding the Court's ruling.

The Supreme Court's 2025 Verdict

• In November 2025, a two-judge Bench struck down the 2021 Act's provisions, terming their re-enactment an "impermissible legislative override" of earlier judgments.
• The Court criticised the government for repeatedly reopening settled constitutional debates instead of implementing its rulings.
• It held that a four-year tenure was "anti-merit" and increased executive interference, jeopardising judicial independence.
• It also held that a two-name panel gave the executive undue discretion in appointments.
• The judgment reiterated the need for a National Tribunals Commission and directed the Centre to set one up within four months, while protecting certain existing appointments in the interim.
• By December 2022, chronic vacancies had left several tribunals "virtually defunct" — for instance, the National Company Law Tribunal had 24 vacancies against a sanctioned strength of 32, and the Armed Forces Tribunal had 24 vacancies against 34.

Key Provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026

• National Tribunals Commission
  • The Bill establishes a National Tribunals Commission to:
    • Conduct the selection process for filling tribunal vacancies.
    • Review the performance of tribunals.
    • Oversee inquiries into complaints against chairpersons or members.
    • Develop and maintain a National Tribunals Data Grid.
• Composition of the Commission
• A chairperson (a former Supreme Court judge or High Court Chief Justice), two judicial members, and two technical members with at least 25 years' experience in relevant fields.
• Term of five years or till age 70, whichever is earlier.
• The chairperson and judicial members are appointed by the central government after consultation with the Chief Justice of India.
• Selection Process for Tribunals
  • A search-cum-selection committee, headed by a Commission member, will include a retired High Court judge, a government secretary, a technical member, and experts.
  • For each vacancy, the committee will recommend one name, with one additional name on a waiting list — a significant shift from the 2021 framework's two-name panel system.
  • The government must make the appointment within three months of receiving the recommendation.
• Tenure and Removal
  • Tribunal chairpersons and members will serve five-year terms, with age limits of 70 years (chairpersons) and 67 years (members).
  • Grounds for removal include insolvency, conviction involving moral turpitude, incapacity, abuse of position, incompetence, or engaging in paid assignments outside office.

Does the Bill Fully Insulate Tribunals from the Executive?

• Not entirely. While the Bill addresses the Supreme Court's core concerns on tenure and appointment discretion, the Centre still:
  • Appoints the Commission's chairperson, members, and secretary.
  • Provides funding/grants to the Commission.
  • Retains rule-making powers over qualifications, service conditions, salaries, and removal procedures.

Conclusion

The Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026 marks a significant course correction, aligning tribunal governance with Supreme Court mandates on tenure and merit-based appointments.

However, by retaining control over funding, rule-making, and key appointments, the Centre ensures its administrative footprint persists — meaning the underlying tension between executive oversight and judicial independence may not be fully resolved.