Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Monday, 03 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2020-11-27 partly_allowed

Madras Bar Association vs Union of India & Anr

Bench: 3 — L. Nageswara Rao

In Brief

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the 2020 Rules governing tribunal member appointments, qualifications, tenure, and service conditions. The Court held that while the Legislature may transfer judicial functions to tribunals, they must remain independent of executive control to uphold the rule of law. The 2020 Rules were partly invalidated for lacking judicial dominance in selection committees and imposing inadequate tenure. The Court directed: establishment of a National Tribunals Commission for autonomous oversight; composition of selection committees with judicial dominance and voting restrictions on sponsoring departments; extension of member tenure to five years; eligibility of advocates with 10 years' experience; enhanced housing allowances; and prospective application of rules from their notification date. Appointments made before modification remain valid, but future appointments must comply with the modified rules.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Constitutional Law Judicial Independence Tribunal Administration Separation of Powers Rule of Law Administrative Law Service Conditions Appointments Judicial Review Basic Structure of Constitution

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login