S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India (1987) | Administrative Tribunals & Judicial Review

Can Parliament exclude High Court jurisdiction over government service disputes? This video explains S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India, the challenge to the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. We cover Article 323A, Section 28, the role of administrative tribunals, judicial review as part of the Constitution’s basic structure, and why the Court examined the qualifications and independence of tribunal members. LEGAL UPDATE: This video explains the approach taken in Sampath Kumar. In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court later held that tribunal decisions remain subject to High Court review under Articles 226 and 227. TIMESTAMPS 00:00 Can Parliament exclude High Court jurisdiction? 01:11 Article 323A and the background to tribunals 02:18 The Administrative Tribunals Act and Section 28 03:36 Tribunal appointments and composition 04:08 Questions before the Supreme Court 04:46 Petitioners’ arguments 06:07 Government’s response 06:59 Judicial review and the basic structure 08:15 The Court’s approach to Section 28 09:28 Qualifications of the tribunal chairman 10:28 Independence from executive control 11:24 Outcome of the case 12:20 Key points for exams 13:31 Final summary Judgments: S.P. Sampath Kumar: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/359668/ L. Chandra Kumar: https://aphc.gov.in/docs/imp_judgements/L_Chandra_Kumar_vs_Union_Of_India_And_Others_on_18_March_1997.PDF 📚 Free notes, quizzes & more: https://www.thelaweasy.com #SampathKumar #AdministrativeTribunals #JudicialReview