9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 923X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er in the light of the decision of this Court in All India Judges, Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (1993)IILLJ776SC , the High Court has been pleased to decide not to allow him the benefit of enhancement of the retirement age from 58 years to 60 years and that the petitioner shall cease to be a member of the judicial service of the State on completion of the age of 58 years in October, 2000. 2. The facts are jejune, Bishwanath Prasad Singh, the petitioner, was born on 10th October, 1942. He entered Bihar Administrative Service (Judicial Branch) on 4.4.1974 as a Munsif. He was promoted as Assistant Subordinate Judge in April, 1985. In May, 1987, he was promoted in Bihar Superior Judicial Service and confirmed on 5.3.1998 w.e.f. 1.9.1991. On 17.2.2000, selection grade was released to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.8.1997. On 17.5.2000 the impugned communication, as abovesaid, was issued by the High Court of Patna through its Registrar General. 3. The impugned communication of the High Court has been challenged by the petitioner mainly on three grounds: firstly, that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court, the retirement age of judicial officers stood increased to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the Union of India and various States, far from complying with the directions, chose to prefer several review petitions which were heard and disposed of by this Court by its judgment dated August 24, 1993, reported as All India Judges' Association and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. (1993)IILLJ776SC (hereinafter, '1993 case'). Feeling anguished by inaction on the part of the executive, this Court issued very many directions in continuation of and also in modification of those made in 1992 case. In the matter of the superannuation age the direction given vide Clause (b) of para 52 was as under:- (b) The direction with regard to the enhancement of the superannuation age is modified as follows While the superannuation age of every subordinate judicial officer shall stand extended up to 60 years, the respective High Courts should, as stated above, assess and evaluate the record of the judicial officer for his continued utility well within time before he attains the age of 58 years by following the procedure for the compulsory retirement under the service rules applicable to him and give him the benefit of the extended superannuation age from 58 to 60 years only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for compulsory retirement could be undertaken in their case before they reached the age of 58 years. [emphasis supplied] We have underlined a few passages while reproducing, as above, the direction made in 1993 case as during the course of hearing much emphasis was laid by Shri R.K. Jain the learned senior Counsel for the petitioner on such passages in support of his submission that the direction made by the Supreme Court has the effect of amending the service rules and extending by its own force, the age of retirement of judicial officers to 60 years. The learned senior Counsel maintained that without regard to the fact whether the existing service rules were amended or not by the State Government so as to be brought in conformity with the direction of the Supreme Court, the judicial officers were entitled to remain in service upto the completion of the age of 60 years and retirement at the age of 58 years or at any time before attaining the age of 60 years was not permissible ever since August 24, 1993 (the date of judgment in 1993 case) except by following the procedure applicable to compulsory retirement under the relevant service rules of the State. We have given our anx ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that this Court intended to confer a benefit on the judicial officers by the force of the judgment of this Court and to provide a mechanism for availing the benefit during the period until the concerned State amended the service rules governing the age of superannuation of judicial officers. Once rules are amended, the age of superannuation would be governed by the service rules. But so long as that was not done, the judgment of this Court in 1993 case was intended to govern the age of superannuation. Under the service rules, if amended, the right to hold the judicial office shall be a statutory right subject to satisfying the requirements, if any, contemplated by the rules. Till then, the extended age of superannuation to 60 years shall be a benefit available to judicial officers subject to their satisfying the test of suitability at the evaluation or assessment to be made by the High Courts in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court. Such evaluation is independent of and other than an assessment undertaken for compulsory retirement in public interest which could be resorted to earlier or later also. The abovesaid view finds support from a number of decisions rendered by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Anr. (2000)2SCC339 . Vide para 13, the Court said that the procedure evolved in 1993 case was a temporary measure and was not to be adopted as a permanent feature. 10. In Ramesh Chandra Acharya v. Registrar, High Court of Orissa and Anr. AIR2000SC2168, Orissa Service Code governing the age of retirement of the petitioner was not amended. The petitioner, retired at the age of 58 years, filed a petition under Article 32 contending that the age of superannuation had stood extended to 60 years by 1993 case. A two Judges Bench of this Court held: There can be no right of an employee to continue in service dehors statutory or administrative rule prescribing superannuation age and continuation in service could be only subject to the conditions provided. XXX XXX XXX XXX ...in the absence of a specific rule made by the State, no judicial officer has a right as such to continue beyond the age of 58. It is only when the High Court, after reviewing all aspects of service including the past record of the officer concerned, specifically orders that in the interest of judicial service of the State it is necessary to retain the particular officer beyond that age-limit and allow him t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C ; BaikunthNath Das and Anr. v. Chief District Medical Officer, Baripada and Anr. (1992)ILLJ784SC . More appropriately it is like premature retirement. It does not cast any stigma. The Government servant shall be entitled to the pension actually earned and other retiral benefits. So long as the opinion forming basis of the order for compulsory retirement in public interest is formed bona fide, the opinion cannot be ordinarily interfered with by a judicial forum. Such an order may be subjected to judicial review on very limited grounds such as the order being mala fide, based on no material or on collateral grounds or having been passed by an authority not competent to do so. The object of such compulsory retirement is not to punish or penalise the Government servant but to weed out the worthless who have lost their utility for the administration by their insensitive, unintelligent or dubious conduct impeding the flow of administration or promoting stagnation. The country needs speed, sensitivity, probity, non-irritative public relation and enthusiastic creativity which can be achieved by eliminating the dead wood, the paper-logged and callous see S. Ram Chandra Raju (Supra). We ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued useful service whereupon the officer would be given an extension in the age of superannuation; (ii) The High Court may find the officer not only not entitled for being conferred the benefit of extended age of superannuation but may also find that the officer is a burden on public exchequer with no utility for judicial service, intolerable even to be retained upto the age of 58 years, the normal superannuation age, then the High Court may undertake further exercise by following the procedure prescribed by the statutory rules governing compulsory retirement and, in the event of such an opinion being formed bona fide, may compulsorily retire him forthwith. The later exercise can be undertaken before or after crossing the age of 58; (iii) The High Court may form an opinion that the officer does not have utility for continued service so as to be retained beyond 58 years of age but at the same time he is not such a dead wood as cannot be tolerated even upto the normal age of superannuation, i.e. 58 years, as appointed by the statutory rules, then the High Court may simply observe silence and allow the officer concerned to retire at the normal age of superannuation. 15. In th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 1993 case and having formed the opinion that the officer was not entitled to benefit of extension, there was no other option left available except to allow the officer concerned to retire at the normal age of his superannuation. Even assuming, without conceding that the retirement at the normal age of superannuation, viz. 58 years, has been consciously called 'compulsory retirement' in the 1993 case, the same would at the most be a 'compulsory retirement in public interest' and certainly not by way of penalty casting any stigma. But in any case other than the exercise of evaluation undertaken by the High Court,, an order of so called 'compulsory retirement' would not need to be passed by the State Government inasmuch as such retirement was not under the service rules but only in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court which judgment does not require an order by the State Government to be passed for its validity or efficacy. Thus, there is no scope for raising the pleas sought to be raised by the petitioner herein. 17. The observation of the Supreme Court contained in Clause (b) of para 52- since the service conditions with regard to superannuation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titled to the benefit of extension in superannuation age, he would retire at the age of superannuation appointed by the service rules. No specific order or communication in that regard is called for either by the High Court or by the Governor of the State. Such retirement is not 'compulsory retirement' in the sense of its being by way of penalty in disciplinary proceedings or even by way of 'compulsory retirement in public interest'. No right of the judicial officer is taken away. Where the high Court may choose to make any communication in this regard, it would be better advised not to use therein the expression 'compulsory retirement'. It creates confusion. It would suffice to communicate, if at all, that the officer concerned, having been found not fit for being given the benefit of extended age of superannuation, would stand retired at the normal age or date of superannuation. 19. The next ground of challenge submitted by the learned senior Counsel for the petitioners is that the impugned order refusing the benefit of extension of superannuation age to the petitioner is arbitrary, based on no material and hence is liable to be struck down on that grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judges and presided over by Hon'ble the Chief Justice held its meeting on 2nd May, 2000. Cases of 27 officers came up for consideration. As to 19 the Evaluation Committee resolved to give them the benefit of increase in the retirement age from 58 to 60 years. As to eight officers, including the petitioner, the Evaluation Committee formed an unanimous opinion that their further continuance in service will not be in public interest as they do not have potential for continued useful service. 24. Bishwanath the Prasad Singh was posted as Additional Judicial Commissioner between 28.5.1997 and 23.3.2000 at Lohardagga. Then he was transferred on promotion as District Sessions Judge, Giridih. Periodical inspections of other work and conduct of the petitioner at Lohardagga were not carried out and therefore the High Court directed a special inspection to be made and entrusted the same to a Judge of the High Court. Intimation of the proposed inspection was given to the petitioner so that if he so liked he could remain present at Lohardagga at the time of inspection. Though the petitioner did not come to Lohardagga but the inspecting Judge came to know that he had sent messages to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction conferred on this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution does not arise. We find the petitioner not entitled to any relief and the petition filed by him liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed accordingly. We make no order as to costs. W.P. (C) No. 505 of 2000 - Swaroop Lal v. State of Bihar and Ors. 27. Swaroop Lal, the petitioner in Writ Petition (C) No. 505 of 2000, born on September 4, 1942 entered the Bihar Administrative Service (Judicial Branch) on 15.3.1974 as a Munsif. On 14.6.1982 the petitioner was promoted and appointed as Additional Subordinate Judge. On 3.4.1985 powers of Chief Judicial Magistrate were conferred on the petitioner. There were further promotions and on 19.3.1994 the petitioner acting as Additional District Sessions Judge was confirmed in the cadre of Bihar Subordinate Judicial Service. On 23.8.1995 senior selection grade was released to the petitioner with effect from 20.8.1986. On 5.9.1998 the petitioner was appointed and posted as District Sessions Judge, Madhubani. 28. His case was also before the Evaluation Committee on May 2, 2000 along with the case of Bishwanath Prasad Singh and several others. The same opinion was f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court observed: The object of such inspection is for the purpose of assessment of the work performed by the Subordinate Judge, his capability, integrity and competency. Since Judges are human beings and also prone to all the human failings, inspection provides an opportunity for pointing out mistakes so that they are avoided in future and deficiencies, if any, in the working of the subordinate court, remedied. Inspection should act as a catalyst in inspiring Subordinate Judges to give best results. They should feel a sense of achievement. They need encouragement. They work under great stress and man the courts while working under great discomfort and hardships. A satisfactory judicial system depends largely on the satisfactory functioning of courts at grass-roots level. Remarks recorded by the inspecting Judge are normally endorsed by the Full Court and become part of the annual confidential reports and are foundations on which the career of a judicial officer is made or marred. Inspection of subordinate courts is thus of vital importance. It has to be both effective and productive. It has to be both effective and productive. It can be so only if it is well regulated and is work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lection of personal whims, fancies or prejudices, likes or dislikes of a superior. The entry must reflect the result of an objective assessment coupled with and effort at guiding the judicial officers to secure an improvement in his performance where need be; to admonish him with the object of removing for future, the shortcoming found; and expressing and appreciation with an idea of toning up and maintaining the imitable qualities by affectionately patting on the back of meritorious and deserving. An entry consisting of a few words, or a sentence or two, is supposed to reflect the sum total of the impressions formulated by the inspecting Judge who had the opportunity of forming those impressions in his mind by having an opportunity of watching the judicial officer round the period under review. In the very nature of things, the process is complex and the formulation of impressions is a result of multiple factors simultaneously playing in the mind. The perceptions may differ. In the very nature of things there is a difficulty nearing an impossibility in subjecting the entries in confidential rolls to judicial review. Entries either way have serious implications on the service caree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
