"If we pass an order then there will be another Ordinance:" Supreme Court in challenge to 2021 Tribunals Ordinance, amended Finance Act-

2nd June,2021

"If we pass an order then there will be another Ordinance:" Supreme Court in challenge to 2021 Tribunals Ordinance, amended Finance Act-


The Supreme Court today communicated that if it somehow happened to pass a request in the supplication recorded by the Madras Bar Association testing the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalization and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 and the changed Finance Act, 2017, the Central government would concoct another Ordinance. The Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ravindra Bhat believed,

"In the event that we pass a request, there will be another Ordinance." Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, showing up for the applicant, inferred that the "Madras Bar Association is consistently there" to challenge the new Ordinance, provoking giggling from those present at the conference.

In its request under the steady gaze of the Supreme Court, the Association presented that the tested arrangements are in "contradiction of the standards of partition of forces, autonomy of the legal executive (both being essential for the fundamental construction of our Constitution), and are against productive and viable organization of equity".

Further, Section 184 of the Finance Act, 2017 contradicts different choices of the Supreme Court on the issue, the supplication stated. After the 2020 judgment of the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association, the Ordinance was declared in April 2021, whereby nine focal enactments were changed. Four councils were annulled accordingly.

The request expressed that first stipulation to Section 184(1) accommodates a base age breaking point of 50 years, which is "subjective, illegal and against the bearings of the Supreme Court."

The Association further presented that it is settled law that the lawmaking body doesn't have the ability to straightforwardly overrule the sets of Supreme Court, what Section 184(7) and Section 184(11) try to do through non-obstante provisos.