Court of Record vs Tribunal
Constitutional courts whose proceedings and contempt power are permanently recorded versus specialised quasi-judicial bodies for tax, services, and company disputes.
Start here
A court of record is a constitutional court whose proceedings are permanently enrolled and which has inherent contempt power under Articles 129 or 215; a tribunal is a specialised quasi-judicial body created by statute under Articles 323A or 323B to resolve technical disputes, subject to High Court review. The Supreme Court and High Courts hold this status — tribunals do not.
Tribunals — CAT for civil services, ITAT for income tax, NCLT for companies — were created to provide expert, fast dispute resolution. They are not courts of record in the constitutional sense. After L. Chandra Kumar (1997), their orders remain open to High Court writ jurisdiction — tribunals supplement, not supplant, constitutional courts.
Side-by-side comparison
| Feature | Court of Record | Tribunal |
|---|---|---|
| Examples | Supreme Court, 25 High Courts | CAT, ITAT, NCLT, NGT, Armed Forces Tribunal |
| Creation | Constitution (Part V, Chapter IV–V) | Parliament / State legislature by law |
| Art. 323A subjects | Not applicable | Services, tax, land reforms, foreign exchange, etc. (Parliament) |
| Art. 323B subjects | Not applicable | Additional matters including land, tax, elections (Parliament/States) |
| “District judge” definition | Includes sessions judge, CPM, etc. | Tribunal member expressly excluded (Art. 236) |
| Basic Structure | HC/SC review power protected | Tribunals valid but cannot block HC writ review |
At a glance
Constitutional basis
Arts. 129 (SC), 215 (HC)
Arts. 323A, 323B + enabling statutes
Contempt power
Inherent as court of record
Only if statute grants — not Art. 129/215 status
Judicial review of orders
Appeal/writ to higher constitutional court
HC writ/supervisory jurisdiction remains (L. Chandra Kumar)
Membership
Judges appointed via Collegium route
Mix of judicial + technical/administrative members (e.g., CAT)
Newspaper scandalises HC judge vs tax appeal
If a tabloid publishes scurrilous attacks on a High Court judge, the High Court (court of record under Art. 215) may initiate contempt proceedings — its record of proceedings is authoritative. A businessman disputing an income-tax assessment goes to ITAT — a tribunal under statutory law. If ITAT errs on jurisdiction, he still reaches High Court under Art. 226/227 — tribunal orders are not beyond constitutional review.
What this means for the exam
Court of record = constitutional status + contempt + permanent record. Tribunal = specialised forum, statutory birth, HC/SC oversight retained.