Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizGK Question
In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court held that:
- Tribunals can completely replace High Courts in exercising judicial review
- Decisions of tribunals established under Articles 323A/323B are subject to judicial review by High Courts/Supreme Court; ouster clauses cannot exclude constitutional courts' jurisdiction
- Parliament can exclude judicial review of tribunal decisions by simple majority
- Tribunals have unlimited power to interpret constitutional provisions without judicial oversight
Answer: Decisions of tribunals established under Articles 323A/323B are subject to judicial review by High Courts/Supreme Court; ouster clauses cannot exclude constitutional courts' jurisdiction
L. Chandra Kumar (1997) tribunal jurisdiction and judicial review: (a) Context: Challenge to administrative tribunals established under Articles 323A (Central Administrative Tribunal), 323B (State tribunals) with ouster clauses excluding High Court jurisdiction, (b) Supreme Court holding (7-judge bench): (i) Tribunals' decisions subject to judicial review by High Courts under Article 226/227 and Supreme Court under Article 32, (ii) Ouster clauses cannot exclude constitutional courts' jurisdiction; judicial review part of basic structure, (iii) Tribunals serve as first appellate forum; High Courts exercise supervisory jurisdiction, not routine appellate review, (c) Applications: (i) Tribunal decisions: Subject to HC/SC review for jurisdictional errors, violation of natural justice, constitutional principles, (ii) Ouster clauses: Cannot completely exclude judicial review; courts retain power to examine constitutional compliance, (iii) Separation of powers: Tribunals handle specialized disputes; constitutional courts ensure constitutional supremacy, (d) Rationale: (i) Constitutional supremacy: Judicial review ensures Constitution, not transient majorities, supreme, (ii) Rights protection: Judicial review essential for enforcing Fundamental Rights against state excess, (iii) Accountability: Ensures government accountable to Constitution, not arbitrary power, (e) Illustrates basic structure protection: Judicial review as unamendable core; amendment power cannot destroy mechanism ensuring constitutional compliance, rights protection, governmental accountability.