The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Union Government to constitute a committee within two weeks to frame uniform guidelines on post-retirement facilities for former Chief Justices and judges of High Courts, observing that essential amenities currently vary significantly from one State to another.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, was hearing a writ petition concerning the security and other post-retirement facilities available to retired High Court judges.
The Court noted that the matter relates to the benefits and facilities to be extended to retired Chief Justices and judges of High Courts.
During the hearing, Chief Justice Surya Kant questioned whether the financial assistance currently provided by some States for security arrangements was adequate.
“In ₹45,000-50,000, is it possible to get a driver and security officer?”
Highlighting the lack of consistency in post-retirement benefits across the country, the Chief Justice observed that there was no uniformity among States in extending such facilities.
The Court suggested that the Union Government should constitute a committee to prescribe uniform norms. It also indicated that the Central Government could consider sharing the financial burden by providing matching grants. The Chief Justice remarked that if such a mechanism was not initiated by the government, the Court might have to constitute a committee itself.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union Government, informed the Court that the Centre had no objection to constituting such a committee. He submitted that the issue required attention and assured the Court that it would be addressed in the spirit indicated during the hearing.
Recording the submissions, the Bench observed that facilities such as domestic help, drivers, telephone services, medical reimbursement and accommodation in government residences presently differ from State to State.
The Court noted that the absence of a uniform policy had prompted the Association of Retired Judges to first approach the authorities and subsequently seek judicial intervention.
Emphasising the need for consistency, the Bench observed that such benefits should not depend on the State in which a judge had served and that there was no justification for disparities in the provision of these amenities.
Accordingly, the Court requested the Solicitor General to persuade the Union Government to constitute a committee within two weeks to formulate uniform guidelines and recommend an appropriate mechanism for financial assistance.
The Bench further directed that the committee submit its recommendations to both the Union Government and the Supreme Court within three months of its constitution.
The matter arises in Justice V.S. Dave, President, The Association of Retired Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts v. Kusumjit Sidhu & Others (Contempt Petition (Civil) Nos. 425-426 of 2015 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 523 of 2002 and connected matters).