Supreme Court asks States, UTs to consider allowing judicial officers to remain in service till 61 years

The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the States and Union Territories to consider enhancing the retirement age of judicial officers to 61 years while a final call is taken on the proposal to increase their retirement age to 62 .

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana passed the direction on a plea demanding enhancement of the retirement age of judges in district judiciary from 60 to 62 years across India

"All State Governments and Union Territories are directed to take a decision, in consultation with their respective jurisdictional High Courts, on this issue. In case they agree, judicial officers in such States shall be permitted to continue in service up to the age of 61 years. Such continuation shall remain subject to the final outcome of these proceedings," the Court ordered.

The top court in 2002 had declined to accept the recommendation of the Shetty Commission to enhance the age of retirement for district court judges to 62 years.

However, since then, some States like Madhya Pradesh and Telangana decided to enhance the retirement age to 62 years.

However, in the case of Madhya Pradesh, the High Court on its administrative side had declined to accord its consent in view of the top court's 2002 decision. The matter then reached the top court.

Today, it was informed that the full court of Madhya Pradesh High Court has passed a resolution recommending enhancement of the age of retirement of judicial officers from 60 years to 62 years.

However, it was also submitted that Punjab and Haryana High Court and certain other High Courts continue to oppose such proposal on the ground that the age of retirement of government employees in their respective States continues to be 60 years or below.

Thus, the Court said the matter needs to be decided at the earliest. Therefore, it directed the State governments and Union Territories to file their respective stands on the issue.

The jurisdictional High Courts shall also place their stands on record within a period of two weeks, the Court said.

However, the Court clarified that those States and High Courts which are in agreement that the age of superannuation should be enhanced, need not file a detailed counter affidavit. A short statement to that effect would suffice, it said.

"We clarify that the question of law formulated at the outset shall be decided by this Court independently, irrespective of the stand that may be taken by the States or the High Courts," the Court added.

[Read Live Coverage]