The Apex Court in the case of Orissa Administrative Tribunal Bar Association v. Union of India & others have upheld the notification issued by the Central Government in 2019 to abolish the Orissa Administrative Tribunal (OAT). The Court further stated that the notification could not be held invalid simply because it was not issued in the name of the President of India under Article 77(1) of the Constitution which states that all executive actions of the Government of India shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the President. It was also contended “The public or the citizenry would stand to suffer most from the consequences of declaring an order that is not expressed in the name of the President null and void.”

The matter revolves around the notifications issued by the President (acting for the Union Government). The notifications were published in the Gazette of India in accordance with law and there was nothing on record to support the suggestion that an authority which was not empowered to issue the notification had issued it.

The Court said that, “A notification which is not in compliance with clause (1) of Article 77 is not invalid, unconstitutional for that reason alone. Rather, the irrebuttable presumption that the notification was issued by the President of India (acting for the Union Government) is no longer available to the Union Government. The notification continues to be valid and it is open to the Union Government to prove that the order was indeed issued by the appropriate authority.” 

The Apex Court in the case of Orissa Administrative Tribunal Bar Association v. Union of India & others have upheld the notification issued by the Central Government in 2019 to abolish the Orissa Administrative Tribunal (OAT). The Court further stated that the notification could not be held invalid simply because it was not issued in the name of the President of India under Article 77(1) of the Constitution which states that all executive actions of the Government of India shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the President. It was also contended “The public or the citizenry would stand to suffer most from the consequences of declaring an order that is not expressed in the name of the President null and void.”

The matter revolves around the notifications issued by the President (acting for the Union Government). The notifications were published in the Gazette of India in accordance with the law and there was nothing on record to support the suggestion that an authority which was not empowered to issue the notification had issued it.

The Court said that, “A notification which is not in compliance with clause (1) of Article 77 is not invalid, unconstitutional for that reason alone. Rather, the irrebuttable presumption that the notification was issued by the President of India (acting for the Union Government) is no longer available to the Union Government. The notification continues to be valid and it is open to the Union Government to prove that the order was indeed issued by the appropriate authority.”