CJI calls out 'rapid passing of orders' by judges near retirement; terms it 'attempt to hit sixes'

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Thursday expressed deep concern over an "unfortunate trend" of judges passing questionable orders on the eve of their retirement. The bench, which also included Justice Joymalya Bagchi, used a cricketing metaphor to describe judicial officers who attempt to "hit sixes" by delivering a flurry of orders for extraneous considerations just before they hang up their robes. These remarks were made during the hearing of a petition filed by a Principal District Judge from Madhya Pradesh who was suspended just ten days before his scheduled retirement.

The petitioner, Rajaram Bhartiya, challenged the Madhya Pradesh High Court's administrative decision to suspend him on November 19, following two controversial judicial orders he passed regarding the stay of mining royalties and penalties. While his counsel, Senior Advocate Vipin Sanghi, argued that an officer cannot be punished for merely passing erroneous orders that are subject to appeal, CJI Surya Kant countered by asking, "What if the orders are palpably dishonest?" The court noted that such conduct undermines the institutional credibility of the entire judiciary.

Adding a twist to the case, it was revealed that while the judge thought he was retiring on November 30, the Supreme Court had recently directed the state to increase the retirement age for judicial officers to 61 years. The CJI observed that the petitioner was unaware of this one-year extension when he passed the contentious orders, believing he was in his final days of service. The bench remarked that the message must go out that the judiciary will not tolerate such last-minute "extraneous" activity.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the suspension order at this stage. Instead, it took exception to the judge using RTI applications to seek information about his suspension, stating that a senior judicial officer should have followed the proper administrative route. The bench granted the petitioner liberty to file a representation before the High Court for the recall of his suspension, directing the High Court to decide on the matter within four weeks.