Not fair to the court: CJI on AG's request for adjournment, Pg9.

Key Highlights:

• The Supreme Court expressed disapproval over the Attorney General's request for adjournment in a case challenging the validity of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021.
• CJI BR Gavai stated that repeated accommodations for the Attorney General were "not fair to the Court".
• The case concerns the Constitutional validity of the 2021 legislation rationalizing tribunals, specifically regarding provisions struck down in Madras Bar Association v Union of India.
• The bench directed Aravind Datar to complete his rejoinder and scheduled the next hearing for November 10.

Detailed Insights:

• The Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 abolished several appellate tribunals and altered the tenure, age criteria, and selection process for tribunal appointments.
• The Supreme Court is examining whether the 2021 law unconstitutionally re-enacts provisions previously struck down for violating judicial independence.
• A key point of contention is the extent of Parliament's power to modify the appointment process and service conditions of tribunal members.
• The government's request for a reference to a larger bench could provide an opportunity to renegotiate the issue with the judiciary.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Tribunal: A quasi-judicial body established to resolve specific disputes.
• Judicial Independence: The principle that the judiciary should be free from influence or control by other branches of government.
• Constitutional Validity: The assessment of whether a law is in accordance with the Constitution.