TheSupreme Court on Monday asked the Union Government to constitute a committee within two weeks to frame uniform norms governing post-retirement facilities for former Chief Justices and judges of High Courts, observing that there was no justification for retired judges receiving vastly different benefits depending on the State where they served.
The Court noted that facilities such as domestic help, drivers, security, telephone reimbursement and medical benefits presently vary significantly from one State to another and emphasised that retired judges should not be subjected to such disparity.
“
“There can indeed be no doubt that these facilities must be ensured on a uniform basis, as there is no reason whatsoever for such amenities being at variance from State to State.”
Accordingly, the Bench impressed upon the learned Solicitor General to persuade the Union Government to constitute a committee for laying down uniform guidelines regarding post-retirement facilities as well as a mechanism for financial assistance, observing that the Centre may have to share a part of the financial burden with the States. Reading in open court, the Bench said:
“
“We expect that a part of the financial burden ought to be shared by the Union and the States in a defined proportion. Keeping these factors in mind, we have impressed upon the learned Solicitor General to persuade the Union of India to constitute a committee to lay down uniform guidelines and also the manner and mechanism for financial assistance. Let such a committee be constituted within two weeks.”
The Court directed that the committee submit its recommendations to the Union Government and place them before the Court within three months.
Court Questions Meagre Security Allowance
During the hearing, counsel for the Association of Retired Judges highlighted the inadequacy of the financial assistance provided by certain States. Referring to Kerala’s policy, he pointed out that retired judges were granted only ₹15,000 per month towards mobile phone, internet and security services. Questioning the practicality of such an arrangement. When counsel explained that the amount had been proposed by the Registrar General of the High Court and accepted by the State Government, the Bench suggested that the State should obtain fresh instructions and provide a “reasonable and respectable” amount instead.
The Court also expressed concern over the lack of uniformity in providing security to retired High Court judges. Noting that one State provided post-retirement security while others offered virtually nothing, Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that the issue required consideration at the national level.
“
“One of the biggest challenges… is the lack of uniformity in all these States. One State is providing [security] after post-retirement, the others are not doing anything at all.”
The Bench observed that the objective was not to provide a luxurious lifestyle but to ensure basic facilities that every retired judge, as a senior citizen, ought to receive with dignity. Addressing amicus curiae, the Court requested him to compile the compliance affidavits filed by various High Courts and prepare a comprehensive note identifying the minimum facilities that should uniformly be made available to retired judges.
“
“Not for a luxurious life, but which are basic things a retired person, a senior citizen requires at this juncture. Prepare a list so that it can be helpful for the committee.”
As regards the State of Kerala, the Bench indicated that it may comply with the earlier directions of the High Court regarding reimbursement without prejudice to the outcome of the committee’s recommendations, following which the State did not press its challenge any further.
The matters have been directed to be listed after three months, by which time the committee is expected to submit its recommendations on a uniform national framework for post-retirement facilities for former High Court judges.