<p>While addressing a conference of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Justice Balakrishnan said: “Utmost importance should be given to the improvement of effective grievance redressal mechanisms and remedies within the various government agencies and departments.’’<br /><br />However, he pleaded that the government should initiate “the overreaching strategy for preventing litigation” at the departmental levels.<br /><br />He, however, preferred the present system of appellate authority of the high courts to continue, otherwise the Supreme Court would be having many more cases before challenging the orders of CAT.<br />He said at an academic level, several arguments can be made against “tribunalisation” of justice. <br />However, keeping practical considerations in mind there are also some compelling reasons for continuing them.<br /><br />“Furthermore, these tribunals are more accessible to litigants, both in terms of lower costs and absence of complex procedures,” the CJI said. <br /><br />Law Minister M Veerappa Moily said CAT should not get entangled in technicalities while dealing with a case. He said by acquitting a corrupt official on technical grounds it will get him justice “but deny justice to others.” <br /><br />The government is formalising the policy of Government litigation. Our efforts are that the government should go in litigation only where it is necessary. Unnecessary appeals should not be filed on behalf of the government, he said.<br /><br />Minister of State for Personnel Prithviraj Chavan said about 150 organisations were added under the purview of CAT. More organisations and all PSUs and public sector banks can be brought in to decrease pressure on high courts and Supreme Court.<br /><br />RTI Act will be amended for “proactive disclosures.” Security-related issues will remain out of bounds of the Act, he added. </p>
<p>While addressing a conference of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Justice Balakrishnan said: “Utmost importance should be given to the improvement of effective grievance redressal mechanisms and remedies within the various government agencies and departments.’’<br /><br />However, he pleaded that the government should initiate “the overreaching strategy for preventing litigation” at the departmental levels.<br /><br />He, however, preferred the present system of appellate authority of the high courts to continue, otherwise the Supreme Court would be having many more cases before challenging the orders of CAT.<br />He said at an academic level, several arguments can be made against “tribunalisation” of justice. <br />However, keeping practical considerations in mind there are also some compelling reasons for continuing them.<br /><br />“Furthermore, these tribunals are more accessible to litigants, both in terms of lower costs and absence of complex procedures,” the CJI said. <br /><br />Law Minister M Veerappa Moily said CAT should not get entangled in technicalities while dealing with a case. He said by acquitting a corrupt official on technical grounds it will get him justice “but deny justice to others.” <br /><br />The government is formalising the policy of Government litigation. Our efforts are that the government should go in litigation only where it is necessary. Unnecessary appeals should not be filed on behalf of the government, he said.<br /><br />Minister of State for Personnel Prithviraj Chavan said about 150 organisations were added under the purview of CAT. More organisations and all PSUs and public sector banks can be brought in to decrease pressure on high courts and Supreme Court.<br /><br />RTI Act will be amended for “proactive disclosures.” Security-related issues will remain out of bounds of the Act, he added. </p>
