Back
SUNEET KUMAR, RAJENDRA KUMAR IV
Association of Retired Supreme Court And H. C. Judges – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Pursuant to order dated 23 March 2023, Shri S.M.A. Rizvi, Secretary, Finance, Shri Sarayu Prasad Mishra, Special Secretary, Finance and Principal Secretary Law, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, are present along with the record.
2. The Court was constraint to summon the officers as the matter pertaining to providing domestic help and other facilities to the former Chief Justices and former Judges of this Court was kept pending on one pretext or the other. On repeated request made by the learned Additional Advocate General, that the matter is pending consideration at the highest level, as many as, five adjournments over several months was granted. However, the authorities did not take decision.
3. The Principal Secretary Law, at the outset, points out that the matter was placed before the Finance Department for approval on six occasions, but the approval was not accorded.
4. On query, Secretary Finance, submits that the proposed Rules submitted by the High Court is beyond the 'competence of the Chief Justice' as the matter pertains to the post retiral benefits of the retired Judges. Further, Special Secretary, Finance stated that the Rules proposed by the High Court in
Retired Judges of High Courts are entitled to medical facilities on par with sitting Judges, affirming the need for legislative uniformity to uphold judicial independence.
The court upheld the legitimacy of a judicial officer's premature retirement based on performance evaluation, emphasizing the absence of necessity for a hearing and the subjective satisfaction of the....
Compulsory retirement of judicial officers is lawful under administrative discretion, based on performance assessments, without necessitating a personal examination by the Governor.
Compulsory retirement of judicial officers based on performance assessments is lawful; natural justice does not apply as such retirement is not punitive but serves public interest.
Compulsory retirement of Judicial Officers can proceed based on performance assessment; requires no personal discretion from the Governor, acting under constitutional provisions and rules.
The authority to retire a Judicial Officer lies with the Governor, acting on High Court recommendations, emphasizing the importance of performance and integrity in public interest retirement decision....
Compulsory retirement of judicial officers based on performance assessment is valid under administrative law; procedural adherence to Rules is crucial.
Premature retirement of judicial officers can be sanctioned based on performance evaluations, and such decisions are typically not subject to judicial review unless tainted with malice or illegality.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
