It is not clear how the writer’s suggestion that a committee made up of retired judges decide the question of who among retired judges should be chosen for post-retirement government appointments, which in turn would secure the independence of the judiciary, will work (Editorial page, “Time to raise the bar”, February 12). In such a scenario, the discretion of the government and the discretion of the retired judge would be substituted for the discretion of the committee which could be equally faulty. The best way would be to marginally increase the retirement age of judges and see that there are no post-retirement appointments. When the seniority of Supreme Court judges was overlooked in the appointment of the Chief Justice of India, Nani Palkhivala had said, “Hereafter we will have only looking forward judges and not forward looking judges.” That will equally apply when retired judges seek office or are appointed to office after retirement.
N.G.R. Prasad,
K.K. Ram Siddhartha,
Chennai
If judges are offered gainful employment post-retirement, they are bound to bend before the government. A way out could be to fashion a panel of experienced judges who shall render advice to the government whenever needed and be paid for their services. This methodology would harness their valuable experience and insights. This is the era of the gig economy.
Deepak Singhal,
Noida
While post-retirement jobs must neither be offered nor sought by retired judges of all grades, the accompanying question is whether retired judges can aspire for high positions. Two very respected judges of the Supreme Court of India, contested, after retirement, for the post of President of India, and both lost. Though one may argue that they deserved the post, they could have been more judicious in turning down the offer. Judges must remain aloof, both during and after their tenure.
V. Lakshmanan,
Tirupur, Tamil Nadu