New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday said that it could not direct the parliament to increase the retirement age of high court judges from existing 62 years to 65 years, as it dismissed as withdrawn a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by a Hyderabad-based lawyer.
Appreciating the issue being espoused by the PIL petitioner A.M. Krishna, a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra told the petitioner, a lawyer practising in Andhra Pradesh high court, that they couldn’t issue directions to the legislature to amend the provisions for increasing the retirement age of the high court judges.
The court, however, suggested Mr Krishna make a presentation to the government for increasing the retirement age from current 62 years to 65 years — at par with the retirement age of top court judges.
The petitioner told the court that a standing committee of parliament recommended increasing the age of high court judges from 62 years to 65 years. The PIL petitioner referred to the 44th report on the Constitution (114 Amendment) Bill, 2010.
Referring to the huge pendency of the cases and the litigants suffering for years to get justice, advocate Manoj Selvaraj said that several eminent legal eagles have backed the idea of increasing the retirement age of the high court judges. The petitioner told the court that the idea of incereasing the retirement age of the judges could be traced to the report of the National Commission to review the working of the Consti-tution headed by Justice Venkatachaliah – former Chief Justice of India.
Referring to a “half-hearted” attempt in 2010 to increasethe retirement age, the PIL petitioner said that at present 399 posts of theHigh Court judges – that is 37% - are lying vacant.
