Recently, the Gujarat High Court has stressed that judges must uphold the highest standards of honesty and integrity, observing that even a single adverse remark or doubt over a judge’s integrity during service can justify compulsory retirement in the public interest.
A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice L.S. Pirzada made the remarks while dismissing a plea filed by J.K. Acharya, an ad hoc Sessions Judge compulsorily retired in 2016 along with 17 others after an evaluation of performance at the ages of 50 and 55. Acharya had challenged the decision of the HC’s full court as well as its implementation by the state government and the governor.
The Bench clarified that compulsory retirement does not amount to punishment and does not require the issuance of a show-cause notice. “A single uncommunicated adverse remark in the service record, or doubtful integrity, is enough to retire a judicial officer compulsorily in the public interest,” the order said, adding that promotions or higher pay-scales have no bearing on such decisions.
The Court highlighted that the HC’s full court may order compulsory retirement based on a judge’s general reputation even without concrete material evidence, as integrity is difficult to document in specific instances. Judicial review of such orders, it noted, is permissible only on very limited grounds such as illegality or breach of procedure.
Highlighting the “collective wisdom” of the administrative and full court processes, the Bench cited an Apex Court ruling that described judges as holders of “an office of public trust” who must demonstrate “impeccable integrity and unimpeachable independence.”
“For democracy to thrive and the rule of law to survive, judges must discharge their functions with integrity, impartiality, and intellectual honesty,” the HC observed, warning that breaches of these values can lead to either disciplinary action or compulsory retirement.
Source Link
Picture Source :
