Increase in retirement age of HC judges - 62 to 65

Founder - President Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Democratic Rights Forum (DRF) (Foundation for Social Justice and Constitutional Awareness for Trial of Public Service) Ph.9322246333 drf.india@gmail.com

 

"Is the Government's decision of introducing a bill to increase the retirement age of High Court judges from 62 to 65 years with a view to clearing the heavy pendency of cases, a good move?" (LexWitness)

 

I am of the opinion that;

 

At the age of stagnation increase in retirement age will not serve the purpose but only increase burden to have outdated and frequently under medical treatment old persons who are enjoying the higher status with highest emoluments & other facilities from public money at the cost of bread of 37% BPL citizens.  If necessary, the criteria for consideration for increase in retirement age should be based on track record of every individual judge keeping in view the ratio of judgments passes by them.

 

Having white elephants & maintaining them only for status symbol at the cost of bread of poor citizens is not a democratic but anti-democratic conduct (misconduct).

 

Please contribute. 


Total likes : 4 times

 
Reply   
 
Advocate

This matter required debates from National level. Should the Judges retirement be measured only from the mounting pending cases created by their own creations?


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 


practicing advocate

increasing the age of retirement is not to serve but it is only to get the govt., benefits.  Still they want to enjoy the facilities given by the govt., because after retirement no one will care them.  So they want utilize the maximum benefit.


Total likes : 2 times

 
Reply   
 
advocate

I am with Rajeev Sir.

 
Reply   
 
Advocate

It should be realised that currently there is a large number of vacancies of judges in almost all the High Courts.  The reason is first there is dearth of talented persons, and secondly those who are talented are reluctant to become Judges.  Those who are willing to become judges are not found to be of judge material. Thus, while on one side there is mounting arrears, on the other side there is depleting strength of judges.  Therefore, government in its wisdom has decided to increase the age of the high court judges from 62 years to 65 years.  

It is a mistaken view that once the judges retire no one will care for them.  In fact, judges really look forward to their retirement, since they can take up arbitration matters - which fetch them quite a lot of money. 

Not long ago, sheerly for want of qualified persons, the age of retirement of University Teachers was raised to 70 years.  We should realise that India is currently facing tremendous talented / experienced resource crunch.

One may say that there are lot of talented youngsters available in the country.  But unfortunately, they are not ready / coming forward to occupy the positions where the vacancies are available.  This is also for the reason that in Government the remuneration is less compared to the private sector. 

This is also one of the reasons that Indian Military is facing severe shortage of officers!

 


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 
Founder - President Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Democratic Rights Forum (DRF) (Foundation for Social Justice and Constitutional Awareness for Trial of Public Service) Ph.9322246333 drf.india@gmail.com

My final view;

 

 

Always first I smell from where the issue is raised and second, from where the solution is suggested.  

 

The main issue is that how to clear the heavy pendency of cases in High Courts?  

 

It is proposed that the retirement age of High Court judges should be increased so they will clear the pending cases and the number of pending cases will be reduced.  In case this logic is considered so it will need to review on the track record of judges as to how many cases they have cleared during the schedule of three years in the consequents blocks of three years during their entire service period.  They are themselves responsible for such heavy pendency of cases.  So it is a question that if they were not able to work in such a disciplined manner at the age of youth so how they will increase their capacity after the age of stagnation?    After the age of stagnation increase in retirement age will not serve the purpose but only increase burden to have outdated and frequently under medical treatment old persons who are enjoying the higher status with highest emoluments & other facilities from public money at the cost of bread of 37% BPL citizens.  They will only take medical facilities and reimbursement of huge medical bills and will pass their OLD AGE as the GOLD AGE while in serving status without service.  In fact it will become service of these old aged useless public servants by the people of India.  The rule of "WORK & PAY AND NO WORK NO PAY" is already broken by the public servants and this Bill be a step ahead toward breaking this fundamental rule.    IT IS JUST ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL.

 

 

Increase in retirement age will also discourage the judges who are in "Q" for promotion.  In this regard if there will be a system of promotion based on the performance than efficient persons will have more promotion opportunities.  But, unfortunately, the bureaucracy has drafted no responsibility and only getting monitory benefits with promotion based on seniority.  As a result the efficient & dedicated persons are being discouraged as they are being forced to think that nothing good will be happened even if worked hard.  I am of the opinion that if track records of judges taken into consideration for promotion and increments than simply the pendency of cases will be sorted out.

 

Please continue discussion.

 
Reply   
 
Nationalist

If they are good and deserving (only to deserving one) then their service may be extended year wise. As far as clearing of pendency is concerned then govt.  must increase the strength  of the quality judges thru fresh recruitment at every level right from lower to higher judiciary, or may hire legal experts on short contract with high salary and perks so that good lawyers too show interest, otherwise they opt to be remain outside. Govt. must clear the pendency with quality, irrespective of the expenditure, once lawlessness will be controlled then the overall performance of the country will improve, which in turn will increase the GDP of the country, thus whole expenditure will be recovered.


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 
advocate

in some state there is no retirement age, legal field is nothing but to enrich the knowledge over hundred and thousands of act and rules. it includes the socilal, religious, political and economical practice to enrich the society from there vision.

a legally sound person can illuminate the society more like politician and lawyer, who served the nation till death.

so freedom should be given to Judges to enrich the society by their knowledge and expertise, like lawyer who assist the court, till end.

 
Reply   
 
Founder - President Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Democratic Rights Forum (DRF) (Foundation for Social Justice and Constitutional Awareness for Trial of Public Service) Ph.9322246333 drf.india@gmail.com

I have forwarded this;

 

 

Always first I smell from where the issue is raised and second, from where the solution is suggested.  

 

The main issue is that how to clear the heavy pendency of cases in High Courts?  

 

It is proposed that the retirement age of High Court judges should be increased so they will clear the pending cases and the number of pending cases will be reduced.  In case this logic is considered so it will need to review on the track record of every individual judge as to how many cases they have cleared during the schedule of three years in the consequents blocks of three years during their entire service period and the cases should be considered individually for six months.  Each period of six month should be observed and considered for next extension is found satisfactory.  Besides medical examination should be done before every extension and should not be considered if taken more than three daus medical leave during the earlier period of extension.  No medical reimbursement should be given during extended period.  The extension period should not be counted as regular service and it should be an agreement for temporary status.  The proper & detailed conditions should be included in the agreement and in case of breech of contract the agreement should be cancelled at any time without any notice.

 

The judges are themselves responsible for such heavy pendency of cases.  So it is a question that if they were not able to work in such a disciplined manner at the age of youth so how they will increase their capacity after the age of stagnation?    After the age of stagnation increase in retirement age will not serve the purpose but only increase burden to have outdated and frequently under medical treatment old persons who are enjoying the higher status with highest emoluments & other facilities from public money at the cost of bread of 37% BPL citizens.  They will only take medical facilities and reimbursement of huge medical bills and will pass their OLD AGE as the GOLD AGE while in serving status without service.  In fact it will become service of these old aged useless public servants by the people of India.  The rule of "WORK & PAY AND NO WORK NO PAY" is already broken by the public servants and this Bill be a step ahead toward breaking this fundamental rule.    IT IS JUST ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL.

 

 

Increase in retirement age will also discourage the judges who are in "Q" for promotion.  In this regard if there will be a system of promotion based on the performance than efficient persons will have more promotion opportunities.  But, unfortunately, the bureaucracy has drafted no responsibility and only getting monitory benefits with promotion based on seniority.  As a result the efficient & dedicated persons are being discouraged as they are being forced to think that nothing good will be happened even if worked hard.  I am of the opinion that if track records of judges taken into consideration for promotion and increments than simply the pendency of cases will be sorted out.

 

 

Ram Samudre

FOUNDER-PRESIDENT

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Democratic Rights Forum (DRF)

Wenden Avenue, MITRA 111/9-10, Matunga (West), Mumbai-400019.

Ph. 09322246333  email; drf.india@gmail.com    drf.india@rediffmail.com

 

 
Reply   
 
Founder - President Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Democratic Rights Forum (DRF) (Foundation for Social Justice and Constitutional Awareness for Trial of Public Service) Ph.9322246333 drf.india@gmail.com

Dear Mr. N. K. Assumi, Mr. Rajeev, Mr. Arvind, Mr. R. Ramchandran, Mr. Ashutosh Jayaswal, Mr. Rajnish Rai,

 

Thanks to all of you for sparing your valuable time and valuable contribution here.

 

Best wishes.

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
CrPC Course!     |    x