The Gujarat High Court’s recent order that a single adverse remark against a judge or a question raised on his/her integrity was sufficient ground for compulsory retirement is significant, as it calls upon the judiciary to adopt the highest ethical standards and urges judges to be ‘honest to the core’. A bench of Justices AS Supehia and LS Pirzada, while dismissing the plea of petitioner JK Acharya, an ad hoc sessions judge who was compulsorily retired along with 17 other sessions judges in 2016 by the High Court’s full court, said that even issuing a show cause notice was not necessary, as compulsory retirement in public interest does not amount to punishment.
Rejecting the argument that past promotions or higher pay scales protect a judge from premature retirement, the bench said that cannot have any impact on the order of compulsory retirement. The court also ruled that judges of the High Court's full court may compulsorily retire a judicial officer on the basis of his/her general reputation even without tangible evidence against him/her, and judicial review of such an order is permissible only on very restricted grounds.
It noted that the decision of the High Court's full court to compulsorily retire a judicial officer in the public interest reflected the "collective wisdom of all the judges". It highlighted the importance of "subjective satisfaction and deliberation" arrived at by careful scrutiny.
The bench cited a Supreme Court ruling to point to the high ethical standards expected from judges. "The office that a judge holds is an office of public trust. A judge must be a person of impeccable integrity and unimpeachable independence. He must be honest to the core with high moral values... For a democracy to thrive and rule of law to survive, justice system and the judicial process have to be strong and every judge must discharge his judicial functions with integrity, impartiality and intellectual honesty," the apex court had noted.
At a time when the government and the Opposition are pursuing the impeachment of two judges from the Allahabad High Court, this ruling is of great significance. The government and the Opposition have called for the impeachment of Justice Yashwant Varma, after piles of burnt cash were found at his residence when he was a Delhi High Court judge.
A motion to impeach him was tabled in the Lok Sabha, but the judge has moved the Supreme Court, challenging the judiciary's in-house report that recommended he be sacked. Impeachment proceedings have also been demanded against Justice Shekhar Yadav by the Opposition after his controversial comments at an event organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. It is imperative that the higher judiciary, too, is held to the same stringent standards that the lower judiciary is subject to.
