A bench of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Prasanna B. Varale and Justice K. Vinod Chandran issued the directive while hearing petitions demanding parity in retirement age for district judiciary officers. The court noted that state government employees retire at 62, while district judges leave service at 60, creating an anomaly within the same public-service framework.
The bench observed that judicial officers and state employees are paid from the same exchequer, making the disparity “unreasonable and difficult to justify.” It added that High Court judges retire at 62, supporting a logical rise in the age of superannuation for district court judges.
Referring to a similar reform adopted by Telangana, the court said Madhya Pradesh should not delay when other states have already implemented the measure. “If it can be done elsewhere, why should judicial officers in MP be denied the same benefit?” the bench remarked.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court opposed the proposal during Thursday’s hearing. Senior advocate Gopal Shankarnarayanan, appearing for the High Court, argued against the increase. However, the Supreme Court declined to accept the objections at this stage and proceeded to grant interim relief.
The issue has been under judicial consideration for months. In May, the Supreme Court had observed that no legal impediment existed to raising the age to 61. On October 27, it sought responses from the state government and the High Court registrar on the matter.
The petition has been listed for final hearing in four weeks, after which the court is expected to deliver a conclusive ruling that may determine long-term policy for retirement norms within the state’s judicial services.
.jpg)
