Supreme Court asks Centre to set up panel for uniform post-retirement benefits for ex-judges
Observing that there was a huge disparity in the assistance provided by different states, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, acting on behalf of the Centre, to constitute the panel within two weeks and the panel to submit its report on the matter within three months.
The bench was hearing a contempt petition filed by Justice VS Dave, President of the Association of Retired Judges of the High Court and High Courts, which raised the issue of security and other facilities for retired judges.
During the hearing, the CJI questioned the adequacy of financial assistance currently provided by some states for the involvement of security personnel and drivers.
The CJI asked, “Is it possible to find a driver and a security guard for Rs 45,000-50,000?” he asked.
“There is a lack of unity among the states. One way is for the government of India to constitute a committee and set the norms. The central government can also match grants. If you do not do this, I will have to constitute one,” the CJI told the attorney general.
The legal official said the government did not face any difficulty in constituting such a committee. “There is no difficulty. We can create it. This is an issue that needs to be addressed. It will be addressed in the spirit expressed,” Mehta said.
The bench, in its order, said that the proceedings pertained to the admissibility of various post-retirement benefits and facilities to retired Chief Justices and high court judges.
“The issue for consideration in these proceedings revolves around certain benefits/amenities to be made acceptable to retired chief justices and high court judges,” the court said. he said.
Basic amenities such as in-home assistance, drivers, telephone facilities, medical reimbursement and maintaining government accommodation vary significantly from one state to another, the ruling said.
“Basic amenities like home help, driver, telephone, medical reimbursement, stay in government offices, etc. vary from state to state. It also appears that lack of uniformity has led the Retired Judges Association to first approach the authorities and then invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court,” the bench said. he said.
The court also said that the Center is a vital stakeholder in this regard, especially as any framework may involve sharing the financial burden with states. PTI
