Wholly Unjust To Allow Tenure Of Four Judicial Members Of CESTAT To Lapse, They Are Entitled To Continue Until 62 Years Age: SC
The Supreme Court has said that it would be wholly unjust to allow the tenure of the four judicial members of CESTAT (Central, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) to lapse and that they are entitled to continue until the age of 62 years.
The Court has directed that the said judicial members shall continue to remain in service.
The two-Judge Bench of CJI D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice J.B. Pardiwala ordered, “… we are of the considered view that it would be wholly unjust to allow the tenures of the four judicial members to lapse between 18 April 2023 and 9 May 2023. Though some of them have applied for selection in pursuance of the limited vacancy circular, this cannot deprive them of the right to assert that they are entitled to continue until the age of 62 years particularly in view of the order of this Court dated 21 August 2018.”
The Bench also referred to the recent judgment in the case of Madras Bar Association (2) v. Union of India & Anr. 2021 SCC Online 4363.
Senior Advocate Arvind P Datar and Advocate T.V.S. Raghavendra Sreyas appeared for the petitioner while Attorney General for India R Venkatramani, ASG Balbir Singh, ASG K.M. Nataraj, and ASG Vikramjit Bannerjee appeared for the respondents.
In this case, all four judicial members hailing from the District Judiciary had applied for the selection to the CESTAT in the year 2016 and as per the term of appointment, their retirement age was 62 years. However, under the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, the term of a judicial member was fixed for four years and this led to a situation where their tenures were due to end on April 18, May 1, May 3, and May 9, 2023, respectively.
The Supreme Court in the above regard observed, “Prima facie, at this stage, it appears uncontroverted that the selection of the above members of the CESTAT was in pursuance of a selection process which took place in 2016. At the material time, the parent legislation stipulated that the age of retirement would be 62 years.”
The Court noted that the Amicus Curiae has filed a short note of submissions and all the counsel shall file written submissions to facilitate the final disposal of the writ petition at least a week before the date on which the final hearing is to take place.
“We accordingly direct that the four Judicial Members, whose names are set out in the tabulated statement in the order dated 3 March 2023, shall continue to remain in service pending final disposal of the Writ Petition”, directed the Court.
Accordingly, the Apex Court listed the matter for hearing and final disposal on July 11, 2023.
Cause Title- Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Anr.