The Supreme Court on Tuesday told the Centre to take instructions on whether the retiring members across tribunals be permitted to continue for one-month as a stop gap arrangement till fresh appointments are made under the newly introduced Tribunal Reforms Act.
The court had earlier permitted retiring members to continue till September 8 and when this period got over last week, the Union government was directed to ensure new appointments are carried out at the earliest. The Act envisages a five-year tenure and a maximum age limit of 70 years (or 67 in some cases). With these conditions, the Centre had informed the court that 248 members have been found eligible to continue and extension orders have been issued to 229 persons with 19 orders in the process of being issued.
However, on Tuesday, several bar associations of tribunals pointed out that the working of certain tribunals has been impacted due to the retirement of members and requested the court to allow them to continue for the time being. Posting the matter on Wednesday, the court asked Attorney General R Venkataramani to take instructions if the current posts where members and chairpersons are retiring are allowed to continue for a further period of one month or such time till the new appointments are carried out.
Following this verdict, the 2026 Act provided for NTC headed by a former Supreme Court judge or a retired high court chief justice as chairperson along with two judicial members (former chief justices or judges of high courts) and two technical members (having over 25 years of specialised experience in fields of public administration, finance, law, accountancy, banking, management, or technology).
The new Act passed by Parliament last month became essential after the Supreme Court struck down the Tribunal Reforms Act 2021 in November 2025 noticing that the 2021 law “merely repackaged” what was struck down by the court in the Madras Bar Association case in July 2021, without removing the constitutional defects identified by the court. The court struck down the four-year tenure for tribunal members and the minimum entry age of 50, stating that the 2021 Act was an exercise of “legislative override” in resurrecting something which the courts held to be unconstitutional.
