Can’t fix cooling off period for judges to take jobs, says Supreme Court
9 Oct 2014 5:56 AM IST
A bench headed Chief Justice HL Dattu dismissed a PIL seeking its direction for stipulating cooling off period for retired judges and restraining governments from appointing retired judges of the Supreme Court and high courts to any post without the consultation and concurrence of the Chief Justice of India or the Chief Justices of the high courts.
Interestingly, Justice Dattu’s predecessor, Justice RM Lodha, on his last day in office, had opined that there should be a cooling off period of two years for judges and said that he won’t take any government assignment during the period.
The court was hearing a PIL filed by one Mohammed Ali who pleaded that it is necessary to pass order regarding this to protect the integrity of judiciary.
He submitted that there is no provision as such in the Constitution as constitution maker had not expected that retired Chief Justice of India would accept any post offered by the government.
The petitioner referred to first Law Commission’s report which said that it was undesirable that Supreme Court Judges should look forward to other government employment after their retirement.
The commission had said that the ‘average citizen may well get the impression that a Judge who might look forward to being employed by the government after his retirement does not bring to bear on his work that detachment of outlook which is expected of a Judge in cases in which government is a party,’ advocate Deepak Prakash said.
He said that such practice has a tendency to affect the independence of the Judiciary and should be discontinued.
Interestingly, Justice Dattu’s predecessor, Justice RM Lodha, on his last day in office, had opined that there should be a cooling off period of two years for judges and said that he won’t take any government assignment during the period.
The court was hearing a PIL filed by one Mohammed Ali who pleaded that it is necessary to pass order regarding this to protect the integrity of judiciary.
He submitted that there is no provision as such in the Constitution as constitution maker had not expected that retired Chief Justice of India would accept any post offered by the government.
The petitioner referred to first Law Commission’s report which said that it was undesirable that Supreme Court Judges should look forward to other government employment after their retirement.
The commission had said that the ‘average citizen may well get the impression that a Judge who might look forward to being employed by the government after his retirement does not bring to bear on his work that detachment of outlook which is expected of a Judge in cases in which government is a party,’ advocate Deepak Prakash said.
He said that such practice has a tendency to affect the independence of the Judiciary and should be discontinued.
Next Story
