The Supreme Court on Friday sought a reply from the Centre on a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of the 2017 Finance Act alleging it would destroy independent functioning of 19 tribunals including the NGT.

The Finance Act, which came into effect from April 1, led to framing of the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualifications, Experience and other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2017 and they allegedly gave "unbridled" powers to the Executive to decide Constitution, qualifications of members, their appointments and removal etc.

"Issue notice. Returnable in two weeks," a bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said while taking note of the PIL filed by NGO Social Action for Forest and Environment (SAFE).

The NGO, in its plea filed through lawyers Vivek Chib and Ruchira Goel, sought quashing of Part 14 of the Finance Act and Rules framed under it.

The bench which asked the ministries of Law and Justice and Finance to respond to the plea, however, refused to stay the operation of the provisions of the Finance Act and the rules.

The petition further said the altercations brought about by the Finance Act, would weaken functioning of tribunals including the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and curtail their powers.

"While the provisions of the impugned Finance Act and Tribunal Rules would destroy the independent functioning of all the Tribunals specified therein, the petitioner, being an activist organisation in the field of the environment, has sought to demonstrate the same with reference to the effect of the Act and Rules on the functioning of the NGT," it said.

It claimed that the tribunal rules have severely diluted the minimum qualifications for appointment of members to the NGT, including the chairperson and judicial members, such that there is a "clear and present danger of persons being appointed as the chairperson/judicial members of the NGT, who have no judicial or even legal training and experience," and of persons without significant technical and scientific knowledge being appointed as expert members, which is in violation of the guidelines laid down by the apex court.

The petition said the tribunal rules give primacy to the executive in the appointment and removal process of the chairperson or president and judicial members of the statutory tribunals and authorities and it amounts to attempting to usurp judicial appointment powers and influence in the administration of justice.

The delegation of powers to the executive amounted to "abdication by Parliament of its essential legislative function, which in the context of Statutory Tribunals is to specify the minimum qualifications of at the very least the Judicial members thereof...," the plea said.

The provisions in question of the Finance Act and the Tribunal Rules are "unconstitutional and will cause grave and irreparable injuries to the rights of the public at large to effective judicial remedies in the context of the protection and enforcement of the right to a clean and healthy environment under Article 21 of the Constitution," it sai