C Y ILLUR Vs. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS in all these writ petitions were working as District and Sessions Judges at various places. They have challenged in these writ petitions the impugned order retiring them from service on their attaining the age of 58 years in terms of Rule 95-A of the Karnataka Civil services Rules, 1958 as amended by the Karnataka Civil Services (First Amendment) Rules, 1997 which is made retrospective from 1st January, 1993. They have also challenged the vires of this amended Rule on the ground that it is ultra vires as being contrary to the law declared by the hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

(2.) THE Supreme Court in the case of All India Judges' Association v. Union of India and Ors. AIR1992 SC 165 , JT1991 (4 )SC 285 , 1992 (1 )KLT103 (SC ), (1993)I LLJ723 SC , 1991 (2 )SCALE969 , (1992 )1 SCC119 , [1991 ]supp2 SCR206 , 1992 (1)SLJ53 (SC ), 1992 (1 )UJ155 (SC ) which is for short known as the "first Judges' case", has held that the age of retirement of Judicial Officers should be 60 years. They issued a direction to all the States and Union Territories to make appropriate alterations under the Rules, in respect of judicial service, so as to fix the age of retirement at 60 years with effect from 31st December, 1992. The Union of India and various States filed applications for review of this order. On such application, the Supreme Court reconsidered the said order, by order dated 24th August, 1993 which is for short known as the "second Judges' case" reported in All India Judges' Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. AIR1993 SC 2493 , (1993 )2 callt1 (SC ), JT1993 (4 )SC 618 , 1993 (2 )KLT581 (SC ), 1993 Lablc2321 , (1993 )II llj776 SC , 1993 (1 )SCALE26 , (1993 )4 SCC288 , [1993 ]supp1 SCR749. In the said order it was stated that the benefit of increase of the retirement age to 60 years shall not be available automatically to all the Judicial Officers irrespective of their past record of service and evidence of their continued utility of the judicial system. The benefit will be available to those, who, in the opinion of the respective High Courts have potential for continued useful service. It is not intended as a windfall for the indolent, the infirm, and those of doubtful integrity, reputation and utility. The potential for continued utility shall be assessed and evaluated by appropriate committees of the Judges of the respective High Courts constituted and headed by the Chief Justices of the High Courts and the evaluation shall be made on the basis of the Judicial Officer's past record of service, character rolls, quality of judgment and other relevant matters. The High Court should undertake and complete the exercise in case of officers about to attain the age of 58 years well-within time by following the procedure for compulsory retirement as laid down in the respective service rules applicable to the Judicial Officers. Those who are not found fit as eligible by this standard, should not be given the benefit of the higher retirement age and should be compulsorily retired at the age of 58, by following the said procedure for compulsory retirement. The exercise should be undertaken before the attainment of the age of 58 years, even in cases where earlier the age of superannuation was less than 58 years. It was made it clear that this assessment is for the purpose of finding out the suitability of the concerned officers for the entitlement of the increased age of superannuation from 58 years to 60 years. It is in addition to the assessment to be undertaken for compulsory retirement and the compulsory retirement at the earlier stage/s under the respective Service Rules. The Court also made it clear that the directions issued are mere aids and incidental to and supplemental of the main direction and intended as a transitional measure till a comprehensive national policy is evolved. These directions, to the extent they go, are both reasonable and necessary.

(3.) THE Government of Karnataka in obedience to the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case amended the Karnataka Civil Services Rules by inserting Rule 95-A. The aforesaid Rule read as under: 95-A. The age of retirement of Judicial Officers shall be raised to 60 years subject to the following conditions, namely.-