Why in News:-
Former CJI Ranjan Gogoi’s nomination to the Rajya Sabha four months after his retirement has reignited the debate on post-retirement jobs for judges.This proves that the judiciary needs a firm mechanism to regulate the issue of post-retirement government appointments.
Of the last 100 judges who retired from the Supreme Court as of 12 February 2020, 70 took up post-retirement jobs. some major cases are like Recently, Justice A.K. Sikri, a well-regarded judge of the Supreme Court of India, accepted a post offered by the government while being a judge of the court. In 2014, former chief justice of India P. Sathasivam was appointed governor of Kerala. Among statutory appointments, H.L. Dattu, former chief justice, is now the chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission and former apex court judge S.J. Mukhopadhaya is the chairperson of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. The Law Commission chairperson is former Supreme Court judge B.S. Chauhan.
There no bar on any further appointement of judegs in India.
Why it is cause of concern-
Law Commission had consistently maintained that judges accepting employment under the government after retirement was undesirable.
It had felt that this could affect the independence of the judiciary.
Explaining the reason for why Supreme Court judges should resist such offers from the government, the Law Commission report says, "The Government is a party in a large number of causes [cases] in the highest Court and the average citizen may well get the impression, that a judge who might look forward to being employed by the Government after his retirement, does not bring to bear on his work that detachment of outlook which is expected of a judge in cases in which Government is a party."
Government should constitute a commission to look in to the mmatter in detail and on the basis of its suggestions a law should be made if required. Because a very basic norm of justice is that justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done.