UPSC Mains 2018 GS Paper 2 Q12: model answer
How far do you agree with the view that tribunals curtail the jurisdiction of ordinary courts? In view of the above, discuss the constitutional validity and competency of the tribunals in India.
What the question wants
Judge whether tribunals reduce the jurisdiction of ordinary courts and discuss their constitutional validity and competence.
How to structure it
How far do you agree ... discuss: give the view, test it with the Chandra Kumar line of cases, then competence issues.
- Why tribunals
- How they curtail courts
- The Court's answer
- Competency issues
- Way forward
How to think it through
The 42nd Amendment let Parliament exclude High Courts from service and tax disputes. Chandra Kumar put the High Courts back. So the 'curtailment' is now partial. The real problem is competence and independence.
Model answer
The 42nd Amendment (1976) added Articles 323A and 323B, letting Parliament and States set up tribunals and even exclude the jurisdiction of all courts except the Supreme Court under Article 136. That is the root of the worry.
Why tribunals were created
Speed, expertise and relief for crowded High Courts: the Swaran Singh Committee's idea.
How they curtail ordinary courts
- Subjects like service, tax, company law and telecom moved out of civil courts.
- Direct appeals to the Supreme Court skipped the High Courts.
- Government, the biggest litigant, controls appointments and funding.
The Court's answer on validity
- S.P. Sampath Kumar (1987): tribunals can substitute for High Courts if equally effective.
- L. Chandra Kumar (1997): judicial review under Articles 226/227 and 32 is basic structure; tribunals are courts of first instance, and their orders go to a High Court division bench. Exclusion clauses are void.
- Madras Bar Association (2010, 2014, 2020, 2021, 2025): tribunals must be as independent as courts; the 2025 verdict
struck down parts of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 on tenure and selection and ordered a National Tribunals Commission.
Competency issues
- Members without judicial experience; short tenures of three or four years.
- Vacancies: many tribunals ran at half strength.
- Dependence on parent ministries.
- Benches only in a few cities, so access is limited.
So do they curtail?
After Chandra Kumar, they no longer shut out the High Courts; they add a layer. The bigger issue is whether they deliver faster justice.
Way forward
A National Tribunals Commission to handle appointments and service, judicial dominance on selection panels, longer tenure, and a single nodal ministry (Law), as the Court has repeatedly urged. A tribunal is only as good as its independence from the ministry whose orders it reviews.
Draw: A flow chart: tribunal → High Court division bench → Supreme Court (after Chandra Kumar).
Keywords, cases and data to drop in
42nd Amendment, Articles 323A, 323B, Swaran Singh Committee, Sampath Kumar 1987, L. Chandra Kumar 1997, Madras Bar Association series, Tribunals Reforms Act 2021, National Tribunals Commission (2025 direction).
Where most answers lose marks
- Saying tribunal orders go straight to the Supreme Court. Chandra Kumar sent them to the High Court first.
Related Mains PYQs
- What is meant by judicial legislation? In this context, discuss the verdicts of the apex court allowing “passive euthanasia” and a “living… UPSC 2026 · GS-II
- Comment on the need of administrative tribunals as compared to the court system. Assess the impact of the recent tribunal reforms through… UPSC 2025 · GS-II
- Compare and contrast the President’s power to pardon in India and in the USA. Are there any limits to it in both… UPSC 2025 · GS-II
- “Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike... .” In view of… UPSC 2025 · GS-II
Fresh examples from current affairs
‘Sentencing shall not be a lottery’: why India needs a Sentencing Council and guidelines
In India, two people convicted of the same crime can get very different punishments depending on which judge hears the case. An Indian Express ‘Experts Explain’ piece on 24 October 2026 argues for a Sentencing Council with guidelines, pointing to the Supreme Court’s words in Sunita Devi v. State of Bihar (2024) that ‘sentencing shall not be a mere lottery’. The Centre has asked the Law Commission to examine a national sentencing policy. This topic connects Articles 14 and 21 with criminal justice reform.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Probation of Offenders Act 1958, BNSS hearing on sentence, Concurrent List. · Mains GS-II: judicial reforms, criminal justice.
24 Oct 2026
Supreme Court: no prior approval under Section 17A needed to probe a bribe demand
In a judgment of 16 October 2026, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and N.V. Anjaria held that investigating a bribe demand by a public servant does not need prior approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Asking for a bribe, the court said, is not part of discharging official duties.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Sections 7, 7A, 17A and 19 of the PC Act. · Mains GS-II/GS-IV: honest officers versus accountability.
19 Oct 2026
CJI Surya Kant inaugurates the first permanent High Court bench in Leh
On 18 October 2026 Chief Justice of India Surya Kant inaugurated a permanent bench of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh in Leh. Until now, a person in Ladakh who wanted to file a writ petition had to travel to Srinagar or Jammu, across high passes and harsh winters. The bench was made possible by a regulation that the President promulgated on 27 August and that came into force on 5 September. It is a simple idea with a big effect: bring the court to the people.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Arts. 214, 231, 241, 226, 39A; common High Court. · Mains GS-II: access to justice, judicial infrastructure.
18 Oct 2026
Three High Court Chief Justices appointed as Supreme Court judges
On 5 October 2026 the President appointed three High Court Chief Justices as judges of the Supreme Court: Justice Sunita Agarwal (Gujarat), Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya (Delhi) and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh (Telangana). The first two have Allahabad as their parent High Court and the third Jharkhand.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Article 124. · Mains GS-II: judicial appointments.
5 Oct 2026Learn the concept
Question text as printed in the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) question paper. The model answer is original Battle IAS work; use it to learn structure, not to memorise.
Want every PYQ in one place? See the Battle IAS PYQ Book.