The Constitution makers of Bangladesh have considered the importance of “Tribunal” with due care and there are as many as sixteen references to ‘Tribunal’ in the Constitution. Bangladesh inherited its legal system from English Common Law, where the issue was related to Administrative tribunals matters. are dealt with by ordinary courts of law.

All over the world tribunals are working alongside common law courts as it provides certain advantages to litigants and justice administrators. Twentieth-century social law demanded tribunals for purely administrative reasons—they could provide faster, cheaper, and more accessible justice, essential to the administration of welfare schemes involving large numbers of small claims, whereas the court of law process was extensive, slow, and expensive.

Definition of Administrative Tribunal

It is not possible to define the term ‘Tribunal’ specifically and technically. The word ‘tribunal’ in the dictionary in common parlance means ‘court of justice’ or ‘seat of judge’.

A tribunal in the general sense is any person or institution which has the power to judge, adjudicate, or determine claims or disputes – it is called a tribunal in its title. For example, a lawyer appearing before a court in which a single judge sat may describe that judge as ‘their tribunal’. Many government bodies entitled ‘tribunals’ are so described as to emphasize the fact that they are not courts of ordinary jurisdiction. The word ‘tribunal’ is not final of the function of a body.

The expression ‘tribunal’ as used in Article 102(5) of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh does not mean the same thing as “court” but includes within the ambit of all adjudicating bodies, if they are constituted by the State and invested with judicial as distinct from administrative or executive functions. Either.

A Tribunal is a judicial assembly, a judicial authority within the purview of Section 74(1) (ii) of the Evidence Act, 1872.

Administrative Administrative Tribunal:

Broadly, the term ‘administrative’ refers to the wide range of government activities in which the power reserve can perform each category of statutory function. Administrative Tribunals are the tribunals which deal with administrative matters Administrative Tribunal is a body established to have jurisdiction over issues relating to or arising out of the Republic or any statutory government entity.

The concept and practice of administrative adjudication of disputes between the executive organs and bureaucracy of the state on the one hand, and citizens and non-governmental organizations on the other, are associated with the creation of administrative tribunals.

Administrative Tribunal is the third type of judicial body mentioned in Part 6 (Article 117) of the Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972.

Administrative Tribunals and Constitution of Bangladesh:

When the Bangladesh Constitution, 1972 was adopted, the constitution makers included the provision in Article 117.

Article 117(1) of the Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972 empowers Parliament to establish one or more administrative tribunals against whose decisions no writ shall lie in terms of the provisions of Article 102(5).

Such tribunals may be established to deal with matters relating to—

a)     Conditions of persons engaged in the service of the Republic and matters and punishment or punishment provided in Part IX

b)    Acquisition, administration, management and disposal of any property vested in or administered by the Government. by any law, including the administration and management and services of any nationalized undertaking or statutory public authority

(c)      any law to which section 102 (3) applies.

Article 102 (3) of the Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972 provides that notwithstanding anything contained in Article 102 (1) and Article 102 (2), the High Court Division shall have no power to make any interim or other order under this Article. Article 47 applies to any law.

Article 47(1) provides that no law made in respect of any of the following matters shall be deemed to be invalid by reason of its being inconsistent with, or taking away or abridging, any of the rights guaranteed by this Part—

a) Compulsory acquisition, nationalization or acquisition of any property, or control or management thereof, temporarily or permanently

b)     Compulsory amalgamation of carrying companies into commercial or other undertakings

(c)     repeal, change, limit or control the rights of directors, managers, agents and officers of any such corporation, or the voting rights of persons owning shares or shares;

d)     Extinction, alteration, restriction or control of the right to explore for or win minerals or mineral oil

e)       Exclusion, in whole or in part, of any government or corporation owned, controlled or operated by the government, or other persons or the conduct of trade, business, industry or services;

f)       Abolition, alteration, limitation or regulation of property rights, any right in relation to any profession, occupation, trade or business or the rights of employers or employees of any statutory public authority or in any commercial or industrial undertaking in Parliament such Act expressly declares that in Part II of this Constitution Such provision is made to give effect to any fundamental principle of State policy laid down.

The ‘Court’ as defined in Article 152 includes the Supreme Court and hence the HCD cannot entertain any writ petition in any matter falling within the jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunal. Thus, it is clear that the Supreme Court will not entertain or entertain any proceedings falling within the jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunal.

When the jurisdiction of the HCD is devolved by the Constitution it cannot exercise it except on grounds of infringement of fundamental rights.

No proceedings, order or decision of any tribunal shall be liable to be challenged, reviewed, annulled or questioned in any court. Decisions of Appellate Tribunals like Tribunals are exempt from any review under Article 102 as Article 117 applies to Appellate Tribunals also.

The combined effect of Art.102 (5) and Art.117 (2) is that no writ petition is maintainable against a decision of an administrative tribunal. The Constitution is silent on the issue of Administrative Appellate Tribunal. Again, when what is challenged is not the Service Rules, but the administrative interpretation of a Service Rule, the writ petition is not maintainable.

Who can go to Administrative Tribunal?

Employees in the service of Government or other statutory public authorities can seek redressal exclusively in Administrative Tribunals for problems relating to their terms and conditions. Any public officer or employee of a statutory public authority aggrieved by any order or decision affecting his conditions of service, including pension benefits, or by any action taken against him, may file a complaint in an administrative tribunal.

However, a private officer or officer of any statutory public authority may apply to an administrative tribunal for an order, decision or action under any law relating to the terms and conditions until such higher authority issues such order, decision or action.

Jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunal

An Administrative Tribunal shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide applications made by any statutory public authority relating to any person in the service of the Republic or his conditions of service, including pension rights, or any action taken in respect of him. as a person in the service of the Republic or any statutory public authority.

Period of limitation for filing a suit

An application has to be filed in the Administrative Tribunal within 06 months from the date of decision by the departmental superior authority. If the application is not filed within the stipulated time, it will be barred by limitation.

Powers and procedure of administrative tribunals

A tribunal has all the powers of a civil court to hear an application or appeal in respect of the following matters viz:

(a) Summons, enforces the attendance of any person and examines him on oath

(b) Require discovery and production of any documents

(c) Evidence required by affidavit

(d) seeking a copy of any public record or office thereof

(e) To issue commissions for examination of witnesses or documents etc.

Limitation period for filing a suit

An application has to be filed in the Administrative Tribunal within 06 months from the date of decision by the departmental higher authority. If the application is not filed within the prescribed time, it will be barred by limitation.

Powers and Procedures of Administrative Tribunals

A tribunal has all the powers of a civil court to try an application or appeal in respect of the following matters viz:

(a) To summon, enforce the attendance of any person and examine him on oath

(b) requiring discovery and production of any documents;

(c) Requirement of proof on affidavit

(d) seeking a copy thereof from any public record or office

(e) issuing commissions for examination of witnesses or documents etc.

appeal

The Administrative Appellate Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals from any order or decision of the Administrative Tribunal.

Limitation period for appeal:

Any person aggrieved by the order or decision of the Administrative Tribunal may, within three months from the date of the order or decision, appeal to the Administrative Appellate Tribunal.

If the appellant satisfies the Administrative Appellate Tribunal that he has sufficient reasons for not preferring the appeal within three months, an appeal may be entertained after the three month period but not later than six months. The Administrative Appellate Tribunal may confirm, set aside, vary or vary any order or decision of the Administrative Tribunal and the decision of the Administrative Appellate Tribunal on appeal.

Estimated outcome of an appeal:

Where no decision on an appeal or application for review of any order, decision or action referred to in the preceding provision has been taken by the higher administrative authority within two months from the date on which the appeal or application was preferred. or shall, for the purpose of making an application to an Administrative Tribunal under this section, after the expiry of such period, it shall be deemed that such higher authority has dismissed the application in appeal.

Jurisdiction of Members of Administrative Appellate Tribunal:

The Administrative Appellate Tribunal consists of a Chairman and two other members to be appointed by the Government.

The jurisdiction of the members of the Administrative Appellate Tribunal is as follows:

• In case of any difference of opinion between the members of the Administrative Appellate Tribunal, the opinion of the majority shall prevail.

• If any member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal is absent or unable to attend any hearing, the Chairman and other members present may deal with the appeal.

• The Member or Chairman of the Administrative Appellate Tribunal may take such administrative measures as it deems necessary for the performance of the functions of the Tribunal.

• The Administrative Appellate Tribunal may transfer any case from one Administrative Tribunal to another Administrative Tribunal at any stage of the proceedings on its own motion or on the application of a party or by a reference by a written order from the Administrative Tribunal.

BINDING EFFECT OF DECISION/JUDGMENT OF TRIBUNAL

All decisions and orders of the Administrative Tribunal and the Administrative Appellate Tribunal are binding on the Administrative Tribunal and the parties concerned.

Conclusion

Although tribunals play an important role in the administration of justice, there are some weaknesses in the tribunals that need to be addressed in the interest of justice. The number of tribunals and their importance have grown so significantly that it is no longer reasonable to treat tribunals as mere data. In ordinary courts of law.

They are an integral part of the normal legal process The reasons for this growth of a system of tribunals reflect both the perceived disadvantages of common law courts, in terms of formality, lack of speed, lack of expertise in some specialist areas of law. , costs etc. and the context of the social or welfare state with the emergence of welfare legislation. They also reflect the perceived advantages of tribunals in that organizations follow informal procedures, can hear cases relatively quickly, are inexpensive and have expertise in specialized matters.