SC says 14 States so far agree to raise retirement age of Judicial Officers from 60 to 62 years

The Supreme Court stated on Monday that fourteen Indian states have consented to increase the retirement age for district judicial officers from sixty to sixty-two years. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant declined to schedule urgent hearings for individual petitions filed by judges nearing or having recently passed the current retirement limit. The court characterized the matter as falling under its persuasive jurisdiction, noting that the dispute exists between the apex court and state governments. Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar argued for immediate listings, pointing out that judicial officers continue to retire daily despite the ongoing legal proceedings. The bench included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana. They affirmed that while the main petition remains listed, they would not entertain individual pleas from specific officers. The Chief Justice expressed hope that remaining states would eventually align with the fourteen that have already agreed to the change. This development follows a directive issued on September 4, where the court ordered states to raise the superannuation age to match that of high court judges, who currently retire at sixty-two. Supreme Court judges themselves retire at sixty-five. In the earlier order, the court specified that seven states, namely Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal, must allow officers who retired on or after March 31 of this year to rejoin if they have not secured other employment. These states were instructed to amend service rules within two months, subject to suitability assessments by their respective high courts. Until such amendments take effect, no officer in these regions could be forced to retire before turning sixty-two, pending a performance review. The court previously rejected arguments based on financial constraints, stating that budgetary concerns could not justify opposing the age extension. It directed twenty-four other jurisdictions, including Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and the National Capital Territory of Delhi, to reconsider their positions. The legal battle traces back to a 2002 judgment where the court declined recommendations from the Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty Commission regarding higher retirement ages. Since that ruling, several states, including Telangana and Madhya Pradesh, have independently moved toward extending the tenure of district-level judges. The current petition seeks a uniform national standard for the retirement age of district judiciary members.