An administrative tribunal is not a Court. It is not an executive body. It stands somewhere midway between a Court and an administrative body. It is a result of the compromise between the judiciary and the executive.
It is established by the executive in exercise of, and in accordance with, the statutory provisions; it is required to act judicially and perform quasi-judicial functions; its proceedings are deemed to be judicial proceedings, and in certain procedural matters it has the powers of a Civil Court; it is not wedded to the technicalities of the Rules of procedure and evidence prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure and the Evidence Act, and it decides non- conventional type of disputes in aid of the programme of the welfare state in accordance with the rules of natural justice.
But the administrative tribunals have also some great demerits and disadvantages. Even though like the institution of delegated legislation, the growth of administrative justice may also be inevitable in the context of modern circumstances, yet this development must be kept under constant and vigilant observation.
1.bp.blogspot.com
ADVERTISEMENTS:
To the extent justice is administered by an administrative tribunal the ordinary judicial process is by-passed. There is great merit in an independent judiciary administering the law in an open Court. Access to Court has been the bulwark of individual freedom and liberty. Most of the tribunals, on the other hand, do not enjoy the same amount of independence of the Executive as do the Courts and the judges.
At times they adopt summary procedures to deal with cases coming before them. In sum, some of the protections which an individual enjoys at the hands of the Courts in lacking in case of tribunal. A Court seeks to act in accordance with accepted principles of law and procedure.
Lawyers are trained to apply principles and weigh evidence. The Courts follow precedents and publish the reasons for their decisions. Some of these features are lacking in the case of administrative tribunals.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
It is, therefore, deemed essential in the interest of maintaining the rule of law in society and to preserve individual freedom, that there should be some kind of judicial control over these tribunals, so that they may be prevented from an excess of abuse of their powers. It is also regarded as necessary the ultimate control in regard to the matter of law should also vest in the ordinary Courts.