Judicial inaction favours those in power

Syllabus: General Studies Paper 2

Context:

High pendency of cases, large number of vacancies and the collegium system of appointment were among the key issues raised by Lok Sabha members recently while debating a Bill that seeks to bring clarity on when Supreme Court and High Court judges will get enhanced pension on attaining a certain age.

Some Critical Observations on the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Bill 2021

• The judiciary failing to stem the tide of majoritarianism.
• Judiciary’s “inaction” always favours those in power.
• A number of examples such the judicial challenge to the abrogation of Article 370 and Citizenship (Amendment) Act.
• The “insensitivity” shown by higher judiciary while dealing with the plight of migrant workers during the COVID-19 lockdown.
• The issue of transfer of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee from the Madras High Court to the Meghalaya High Court by the SC Collegium, and said that the decision was tantamount to “wasting a property of the nation”.
• Opposition called for a mechanism to ensure accountability for corruption in the judiciary.
• Several members also stressed the need to increase the retirement age of High Court judges and bring it on a par with the retirement age of SC judges. As of now, HC judges retire at 62 and SC judges at 65.
• Some members called for a cooling-off period for judges, saying two former Chief Justices of India were “demoted” — one was appointed a Governor and the other became a Rajya Sabha member.

Key Features of the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Bill, 2021

• It clarifies on when Supreme Court and High Court judges are entitled to an additional quantum of pension or family pension on attaining a certain age.
• Bill to amend High Court judges Act introduced in Lok Sabha.
• The bill proposes to insert an explanation in section 17B of the High Court Judges Act and in section 16B of the Supreme Court Judges Act to clarify the intention of the government.
• Under the two Acts, a sumptuary allowance is paid to judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court to compensate for expenses incurred on account of entertaining visitors.
  • The Bill seeks to revise this allowance with effect from September 22, 2017.
• The two Acts specify that judges of the High Court and the Supreme Courts will be entitled to the use of an official residence, without payment of rent.Further, if judges do not use this entitlement, they will be paid a monthly allowance equal to 30% of their salary.
  • The Bill seeks to revise this allowance to 24% of their salary. Further, it specifies that this allowance will be revised to: (i) 27% of salary when the dearness allowance (DA) crosses 25%, and (ii) 30% of salary when DA crosses 50%.
• Pension:  The two Acts specify the pension for High Court and Supreme Court judges based on: (i) if they have previously held a pensionable post under the central or state governments, or (ii) if they have not held any such post.
  • The Bill seeks to revise the pension for judges under both these categories.   Further, it also revises the cap on maximum pension payable to these judges

The Hindu link-

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/judicial-inaction-favours-those-in-power-tharoor/article37889523.ece

https://www.firstpost.com/politics/centre-to-table-judges-salaries-and-service-amendment-bill-in-lok-sabha-key-features-of-proposed-legislation-10191431.html

Question- Judiciary requires reforms from inside to ensure effective functioning and accountability. Comment .