Sign In
By signing in or creating an account, you agree with Associated Broadcasting Company's Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
By signing in or creating an account, you agree with Associated Broadcasting Company's Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
New Delhi: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Wednesday said there is an rising trend of judges issuing a slew of orders for extraneous considerations on the eve of their retirement. This apparently was an unusual and candid acknowledgement of judicial corruption.
The bench of the apex court was headed by CJI Surya Kant and comprised Justice Joymalya Bagchi. It highlighted this "unfortunate trend" of judges trying to "hit sixes" just before retirement.
The observation came as the top court was hearing a petition filed by a principal district judge from Madhya Pradesh who contested his suspension, which was slapped barely 10 days before his retirement. The suspension was reportedly related to two judicial orders issued by the judge.
The bench said: "Petitioner just before retirement started hitting sixes. It is an unfortunate trend."
It was on November 30 that the district judge was originally due to retire. However, he was suspended on November 19 following the two judicial orders. Although he was originally set to retire on November 30, the Supreme Court on November 20 directed the Madhya Pradesh government to postpone his retirement by a year after the state raised the retirement age of its employees to 62.
In a sharp remark on the situation, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said: "The judicial officer did not know, when he passed those two orders, that his retirement age had been increased by one year. There is a growing trend of judges passing so many orders just before retirement."
The top court also questioned why the district judge had not knocked at the doors of the high court to challenge his suspension. During the hearing, counsel for the judge said that since it was a full court decision, the judicial officer felt it would be better to approach the Supreme Court for a fair hearing.
Appearing for the judge, senior advocate Vipin Sanghi told the apex court that the officer had an "impressive career" and said he had received very good ratings in his annual confidential reports. The advocate asked: "How can an officer be suspended for judicial orders which can be appealed against and rectified by the higher judiciary?"
In its response, the bench said, "Disciplinary proceedings cannot be initiated against a judicial officer for passing orders which are erroneous. He cannot be suspended for this. But if the orders are palpably dishonest?"
The court said that there have been several instances where full court decisions were overturned by high courts in the exercise of their judicial powers. It refused to entertain the plea and directed the petitioner to go to the high court. The court also objected to the judicial officer’s attempt to obtain the grounds for his suspension through Right to Information (RTI) applications. The bench said: "He could have submitted a representation in this regard. It is not expected of a senior judicial officer to resort to the RTI route to get information."
