The SC rejects the argument that retired judges should have a cooling-off period before accepting political positions

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court rejected a petition asking for a two-year “cooling-off” period before retired judges of the supreme court and high courts may accept political positions.

Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, sitting as a bench, said that it must be left up to the judge’s “better sense” whether or not to take any job after retiring.

The panel ruled that it was not appropriate to discuss whether a former judge may be nominated for or elected to the Rajya Sabha or the Lok Sabha.

The bench rejected the request and said that the question of whether a retired judge should take any job or not must be left up to the better judgment of the judge in question or a legislation that has to be passed. It cannot, however, be the subject of a directive under Article 32 of the Constitution.

According to the petitioner association’s attorney, the absence of such a clause was leading to misunderstandings among the general public.

The bench questioned the attorney, “What is a political appointment?”

“Everything is pointless. The bench said that it is up to the judge to decide whether or not to refuse.

The petitioner was questioned by the bench if the supreme court could order that no one should apply for a position at a tribunal after retiring.

According to the petitioner’s attorney, a two-year cooling-off period should apply exclusively to appointments that are subject to the executive’s discretion.

The bench noted that many decisions are left up to the judge’s discretion and said that the petitioner has chosen one case. However, it made no reference of a name in court.

The bench remarked, “You don’t want a particular person to become Governor.”