The Supreme Court in the case PC Financial Services Private Limited Versus the Union of India & Or’s the court observed that all proceedings across the Board should be kept in abeyance to obviate the possibility of the High Court’s being flooded with cases, till the FEMA Appellate Tribunal vacancies are filled up.
proceedings across the Board should be kept in abeyance to obviate the possibility of the High Court’s being flooded with such an issue though it may require an order that till the Tribunal vacancies are filled up, the parties are compelled to approach the High Courts in the absence of the FEMA Appellate Tribunal this being the position Once the Tribunal, as envisaged, not filling the vacancies for a period of two years frustrates the judicial remedy and this situation is not only with the concerning matter but with also the different matters too, The Bench observed.
On the special leave petition being filled as well as on the prayer for interim relief returnable on 06.05.2022, the bench issued notice with respect to the above observations being made.
the bench comprising of Justice Kaul had warned that it will stay all proceedings unless the Central Government fills up the vacancies while hearing another matter relating to PMLA Appellate on 24th March.
a bench comprising of Justice AM Khanwilkar had also expressed the concerns few weeks back at the unfilled vacancies in tribunals.
The Bench headed by Chief Justice Of India NV Ramana has criticized Union Government over the delay in filling up Tribunal vacancies while dealing with the matter related to filling up of vacancies in Tribunals on various occasions.
The Bench comprising of Justice M. M. Sundresh and Justice S. K. Kaul was hearing a Special Leave Petition decision of a division bench of the Telangana High Court on February 25, 2022 passed by the Single Judge allowing the provisional release of a sum seized under FEMA. Noting that the seizure was confirmed by the competent authority under section 37A of the FEMA in a writ appeal whereby the division bench had set aside the order dated 11.02.2022 In the aforesaid statutory provision provides for a remedy of appeal and therefore, the respondent No.1/writ petitioner shall certainly be free to prefer an appeal or to avail the other remedies available under the law against the order of the competent authority, further the division bench observed.
the bench of Justice Kaul and Justice Sundresh observed that no purpose is being subserved by relegating the petitioner to a Tribunal as there is no Tribunal for the last two years, pointed out by the learned counsel of the petitioner.
Further the court observed that It may require an order that till the Tribunal vacancies are filled up, proceedings across the Board should be kept in abeyance to obviate the possibility of the High Court’s being flooded with such an issue.