New Delhi— Chief Justice of India Bhushan R. Gavai on Thursday expressed sharp disapproval after the Union government sought yet another adjournment in the long-pending hearing on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021. The CJI remarked that the government appeared to be delaying the matter until after his retirement on November 23.
When Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati requested to defer Friday’s hearing, citing Attorney General R. Venkataramani’s engagement in an international arbitration, CJI Gavai’s response was forthright. “If you do not want us to hear and deliver the judgment, just tell us. Looks like you want this matter only after November 24,” he said.
The CJI noted that the court had already accommodated the Attorney General multiple times, yet he remained unavailable. “We have a fleet of learned ASGs. Let somebody else argue this matter,” he added. Bhati replied that the AG was personally conducting the case, but Justice Gavai pointed out that despite three adjournments, the AG had not appeared even once.
CJI Gavai also expressed displeasure over the government’s midnight application on November 2, seeking to refer the matter to a Constitution Bench — after the petitioners had already completed their arguments. “First, we keep adjourning it on your request and then, late in the night, we get an application asking for a Constitution Bench reference. This is very unfair to the court. We wanted to hear this case tomorrow and utilise the weekend to write the judgment,” he said.
Emphasizing that the court respects the office of the Attorney General but not at the cost of judicial process, CJI Gavai remarked, “In this manner, hearings are being shunted out.” The matter was ultimately listed for hearing on Monday, November 10, with a clear direction: “Inform the AG that we will close the matter on Monday.”
This exchange followed a similar confrontation earlier in the week. On November 3, the same bench comprising CJI Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran had criticized the Centre for its “shocking” last-minute attempt to refer the case to a five-judge bench after the petitioners had already argued on merits. The CJI had then observed that the Union appeared to be “playing tactics with the court.”
Attorney General Venkataramani had maintained that his request was not tactical but based on the substantial constitutional questions raised by the petitions. However, the bench clarified that it would consider such a referral only if it independently found sufficient merit.
The petitions, led by the Madras Bar Association, challenge provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, which lay down uniform tenure, age limits, and appointment procedures for tribunal chairpersons and members. Petitioners argue that these provisions undermine judicial independence and violate the principle of separation of powers.
Senior advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for the Association, pointed out that the Supreme Court had previously struck down similar provisions in the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021, declaring them unconstitutional. Despite that, the Centre re-enacted many of the same provisions in the new Act.
Meanwhile, the Union government’s application contends that the case involves major constitutional questions — including whether the Supreme Court can direct Parliament on how to legislate and whether judicial directions on lawmaking amount to encroachment upon legislative power.
