Aishwarya V Ravindranath, School of Law, Christ (Deemed to be) University, Bangalore
ABSTRACT
Welfarism exponentially spiked governmental workload. Consequently, governmental interaction with the public also rose, leading to the diversification of jurisprudence on matters such as public responsibility, accountability, compensatory justice etc. There arose an unprecedented need to establish alternate structures of justice to aid the High Courts and Supreme Court in the speedy disposal of cases and to lessen the mounting arrears in litigation, and therefore, Tribunals became a thing of necessity. However, the excuse that tribunals are more cost and time effective has positively plunged the Indian judiciary into a diluted state of Tribunalisation. On the other hand however, France’s greatest contributions to the world is their administrative tribunal system, often lauded as the “bulwark of civil liberties”.
Therefore, this paper primarily, is a comparative analysis between France’s Droit Administratif with India’s tribunals. Part Two of the paper introduces the tribunal system as it exists in France. Part Three briefly traces the contours of how the tribunal system has been defined and understood by the Indian judiciary. An attempt is also made to appraise the evolution of the tribunals in India. Most importantly, against the backdrop of the weeded and incessant way in which Tribunals grew in India, the constitutional validity of it has been analysed with the aid of judicial pronouncements. Concludingly, this paper draws out the comparative between the Indian and French Tribunal models.
Keywords: Tribunalisation, Droit Administratif, Articles 323A and 323B.
