Understanding the Influence of Appellate Tribunals on the Judicial Process in India
Keywords:
Appellate Tribunals, Judicial Process, Judicial Review, Constitutional RightsAbstract
Appellate tribunals play a crucial role in the Indian judicial system by addressing specialized disputes and alleviating the burden on traditional courts. Established to provide faster adjudication in areas such as taxation, corporate law, administrative matters, and environmental concerns, these quasijudicial bodies aim to deliver justice efficiently and cost-effectively. Tribunals are designed to combine legal expertise with technical knowledge, enabling informed decisions in complex legal domains.
However, their influence on the judicial process is both transformative and challenging. While they enhance judicial efficiency by expediting case resolution and reducing pendency, concerns about judicial independence, procedural fairness, and executive control over appointments have raised significant debates. Judicial review by High Courts and the Supreme Court ensures that appellate tribunals function within constitutional boundaries, safeguarding principles of natural justice and protecting fundamental rights. Landmark judgments, such as L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), have reinforced the importance of judicial oversight to maintain accountability and prevent misuse of power. This study examines the effectiveness of appellate tribunals in reducing judicial workloads, their role in protecting constitutional rights, and the challenges they face in maintaining
transparency and independence. The findings emphasize the need for institutional reforms, improved regulatory frameworks, and stronger oversight mechanisms to enhance the credibility and integration of appellate tribunals into India’s judicial system, ensuring a more accessible and efficient justice delivery process.
References
Robinson, N. (2013). Structure matters: The impact of court structure on the Indian and US Supreme Courts. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 61(1), 173-208.
Mate, M., & Kapiszewski, D. (2013). Public interest litigation and the transformation of the Supreme Court of India. Consequential courts: judicial roles in global perspective, 262-88.
Robinson, N. (2009). Expanding judiciaries: India and the rise of the good governance court. Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev., 8, 1.
Wallace, J. C. (2005). Improving the Appellate Process Worldwide Through Maximizing Judicial Resources. Vand. J. Transnat'l L., 38, 187.
Krishnan, J. K., Kavadi, S. N., Girach, A., & Khupkar, D. (2014). Grappling at the grassroots: access to justice in India's lower tier. Harv. Hum. Rts. J., 27, 151.
Cane, P., Hertogh, M., & Halliday, S. (2004). Understanding judicial review and its impact. Judicial review and bureaucratic impact: International and interdisciplinary perspectives, 15-42.
Amirante, D. (2011). Environmental courts in comparative perspective: Preliminary reflections on the National Green Tribunal of India. Pace Envtl. L. Rev., 29, 441.
JJ, F. M. I. K. (2014). Supreme Court of India. ORDER, 10, 20141.
Thiruvengadam, A. K., & Joshi, P. (2012). Judiciaries as crucial actors in Southern regulatory systems: A case study of Indian telecom regulation. Regulation & Governance, 6(3), 327-343.
Tarr, G. A. (2019). Judicial process and judicial policymaking. Routledge.
Bhuwania, A. (2017). Courting the people: Public interest litigation in post-emergency India (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.
Bhattacharya, P., Paul, S., Ghosh, K., Ghosh, S., & Wyner, A. (2019). Identification of rhetorical roles of sentences in indian legal judgments. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (pp. 3-12). IOS Press.
Gill, G. N. (2016). Environmental justice in India: the National Green Tribunal and expert members. Transnational Environmental Law, 5(1), 175-205.
Graham, B. L. (2004). Toward an understanding of judicial diversity in American courts. Mich. J. Race & L., 10, 153.
Segal, J. A., Spaeth, H. J., & Benesh, S. C. (2005). The Supreme Court in the American legal system. Cambridge University Press.
Gawas, V. M. (2017). Doctrinal legal research method a guiding principle in reforming the law and legal system towards the research development.
Geyh, C. G. (2006). When courts and Congress collide: The struggle for control of America's judicial system. University of Michigan Press.
Carp, R. A., Manning, K. L., Holmes, L. M., & Stidham, R. (2019). Judicial process in America. Cq Press.
Brinks, D. M., & Gauri, V. (2014). The law’s majestic equality? The distributive impact of judicializing social and economic rights. Perspectives on Politics, 12(2), 375-393.
Falavigna, G., Ippoliti, R., & Ramello, G. B. (2018). DEA-based Malmquist productivity indexes for understanding courts reform. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 62, 31-43.
