Abolish Tribunals If You Can't Give Amenities To Members: Supreme Court To Centre
The Supreme Court flagged the lack of proper facilities as the reason behind the retired judges feeling discouraged.
- Date & Time:
- |
- Views: 22
- |
- From: India News Bull
File photo
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday suggested that tribunals should be abolished if the government cannot provide adequate facilities to their members, citing this as the main reason former high court judges decline post-retirement tribunal positions.
Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan highlighted that the lack of proper amenities discourages retired judges from accepting these roles, suggesting all such matters should return to high courts if conditions cannot be improved.
"Former judges apply and interview for these positions but then decline to take charge because they discover the reality of being a tribunal member," the court observed. "For those who served as chairpersons, former chief justices of high courts, or former Supreme Court judges, virtually no facilities are provided. They must constantly request even basic stationery. The fault lies with the Union government who created these tribunals," the bench remarked.
Addressing Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee, the court stated, "Parliament passed these Acts without considering judicial impact or providing sufficient expenditure. Members must beg for stationery, housing, transportation—often receiving the most dilapidated vehicles in your department. The way former Chief Justices and Judges are treated explains their reluctance to accept appointments when reality becomes apparent."
The court emphasized that retired judges face significant uncertainty regarding housing and other amenities after receiving appointment orders.
"We're telling you without casting aspersions—please treat former Chief Justices and High Court judges who accept your positions with dignity," the bench urged.
The Supreme Court suggested forming an inter-ministerial committee, including the Department of Personnel and Training, to identify shortcomings and establish uniform standards for providing infrastructure and facilities to tribunal members. Banerjee assured the court he would convey this message to the Centre.
The court was hearing a petition filed by NGT Bar Association Western Zone regarding tribunal vacancies. The Centre informed the court that two former judges had declined offered appointments, necessitating a time-consuming fresh appointment process.
While criticizing the government's approach, the bench also disapproved of retired judges declining appointments after initially showing interest, noting, "This conduct is not correct either. They don't want to relocate."
The court rejected the petitioner's request to allow existing members to continue beyond retirement until new appointments are made. The case has been scheduled for further hearing on December 16.