The move by the CJI to retire lazy, indolent, ineffective and corrupt judges of lower courts is undoubtedly laudable, but he needs to set his own house in order. He should devise a mechanism for retiring such judges of the higher judiciary also.

The underlying message in the CJI’s October 14 letter to all chief justices of high courts (HC) is loud and clear — say goodbye to ’indolent, infirm and those with doubtful reputation and utility’ by compulsorily retiring them even if they have put in more than 30 years of service.

The number of years one has put in was not a consideration to take a lenient view against those showing deviant behaviour, the CJI said and asked HC chief justices to evaluate the performance of judges in the lower courts once they reached 50 years.

While the action of the CJI is indeed laudable, it may be mentioned that there are corrupt, lazy and ineffectives judge of HCs and SC also. CJI should devise a mechanism for retiring such corrupt, lazy and ineffective judges of the higher judiciary also. How would CJI ensure that he says goodbye to ’indelent, infirm and those with doubtful reputation and utility’ by compulsorily retiring judges of the HCs and SC also? At present, they cannot be removed

The scanner will continue to remain focussed on them till they retire at the age of 60.

At any point of time after attaining 50, a judicial officer found unsuitable should be eased out by prematurely retiring him, the CJI said and assured the HCs that the ousted judges would receive no sympathetic treatment from the courts as premature retirement cast no stigma on the affected person.

“If implemented in right earnest, such provision will keep deviant behaviour in check, besides getting rid of those who are found to be indolent, ineffective or with doubtful integrity,” CJI Balakrishnan said.

While the action of CJI is laudable, CJI should bring his own house ie the SC as also the HCs, in order. He must ensure that the judges of the SC and of the HCs who are found to be indolent, ineffective or with doubtful integrity should be get rid of. At present, the SC of India comprises the Chief Justice and not more than 25 other judges appointed by the President of India.

SC judges retire upon attaining the age of 65 years. In order to be appointed as a judge of the SC, a person must be a citizen of India and must have been, for at least five years, a judge of a HC or of two or more such courts in succession, or an advocate of a HC or of two or more such courts in succession for at least 10 years or he must be, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist. Provisions exist for the appointment of a judge of a HC as an ad-hoc judge of the SC and for retired judges of the SC or HCs to sit and act as judges of that court.

The Constitution seeks to ensure the independence of SC judges in various ways. A judge of the SC cannot be removed from office except by an order of the President passed after an address in each House of the Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-third of members present and voting, and presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. A person who has been a judge of the SC is debarred from practicing in any court of law or before any other authority in India

Now, in these days of coalition government at the Centre, it may not be possible to muster a strength of two thirds of members present and voting to ensure removal of a SC judge. So, the CJI to make the SC and HCs effective and free from corruption and laziness, must devise some new ways for removing corrupt, indolent, ineffective judges of the SC and HCs. The government also needs to look into the matter.