2. It deals with only the service matter. 3.
The members need not be a trained person in law. 4. The decision is subjective. 5. It is more rapid, cheap and efficient. 6.
It is a new trend in the world, including India. 7. It solves the service matters basing on departmental policy and technicality. 8. It need not follow precedents, principles of res judicator, estoppels.
9. ‘Independence of judiciary’ principle is not seen in Administrative tribunals. The executive interferes with the tenure, terms and conditions of service of the members and Chairman. Of course, certain constitutional guarantees are provided to check the executive power. 10. Strictly speaking, it is a branch of Government. Lord Greene criticizes Tribunal’s functions are ‘Hybrid functions’ i.
e. executive plus judicial. 11 To solve the over-burden on the courts, the system of Administrative Tribunals has been developed. 12. They are functional rather than a theoretical and legalistic approach. 13. They enjoy a wide discretion. 14.
Tribunal possesses some of the trappings of a court but not all.
1. Court has to follow C.
P.C., Evidence rules. 2. It deals all matters. 3. The judge or magistrate in the Court is a trained person in law. 4.
The decision is objective. 5. It is more lengthy, costlier, and inefficient particularly in service matters, when compared with tribunal.
6. The system of Court was established some centuries back. 7. It solves all matters basing on the rule of law, procedures, oath, evidence, etc. 8. It should follow precedents, principles of res judicata, estoppel. 9.
Courts function under the principles of ‘independence of judiciary’. Therefore, the executive does not interfere with the judges’ tenure, terms and conditions of service. 10. It is purely judicial.
11. The traditional courts are overburdened with accumulated cases. 12. These are conservative, rigid, and procedural technically adhered.
13. They enjoy a lesser discretion compared with Administrative Tribunals. 14. The Court possesses all the judicial qualities.