‘What If Orders Are Palpably Dishonest?’
New Delhi: In a surprise public acknowledgement of corruption in judiciary, a Supreme Court bench led by CJI Surya Kant on Wednesday said there is a growing trend of judges passing a series of orders for extraneous considerations on the eve of their retirements.While hearing a petition filed by a Madhya Pradesh principal district judge challenging his suspension 10 days prior to retirement, allegedly because of two judicial orders passed by him, the bench of CJI Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “Petitioner just before retirement started hitting sixes. It is an unfortunate trend. I do not want to elaborate on it.”Senior advocate Vipin Sanghi, appearing for the judicial officer, said he had an impressive career with very good rating in annual confidential reports. He was to superannuate on Nov 30 but was suspended on Nov 19, ostensibly because of two judicial orders. “How can an officer be suspended for judicial orders which can be appealed against and rectified by higher judiciary?” asked Sanghi.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?” SC takes exception to seeking info on suspension through RTI applications The judicial officer was to retire on Nov 30. SC on Nov 20 directed the MP govt to postpone the retirement by one year as it had increased the retirement age of state employees to 62 years. The judicial officer would now retire on Nov 30, 2026. “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 CJI said.The bench asked Sanghi as to why the judicial officer did not approach HC to challenge the suspension. Sanghi said that since it was a full court decision, the judicial officer thought it would be better to move SC for a fair hearing.The bench said, “There are so many instances when full court decisions have been set aside by HCs on the judicial side.” The bench also took exception to the judicial officer seeking grounds for his suspension through RTI applications. “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. We see no ground to entertain the petition. The petitioner can make a representation to the HC for recall of the suspension order. The HC would decide his representation in four weeks,” the bench said.
