Supreme Court Demands Response on Judges’ Retirement Age in Madhya Pradesh

The Supreme Court of India has requested responses from the Madhya Pradesh government and the high court registry regarding a petition that challenges the refusal to raise the retirement age of judicial officers in the state from 60 to 61 years. This action comes in response to a plea filed by the Madhya Pradesh Judges Association that criticizes the high court’s administrative decision not to increase the retirement age despite earlier directives from the apex court.

On May 26, 2023, a bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai stated there was no legal barrier to increasing the retirement age for judicial officers in Madhya Pradesh. The Supreme Court’s latest hearing included Justice K Vinod Chandran and resulted in the issuance of notices to both the state government and the high court. The judges’ association contends that the high court’s refusal to comply with the Supreme Court’s order is a violation of its directives.

The petition highlights that the Madhya Pradesh High Court had been instructed to make an administrative decision on the retirement age within two months following the May ruling. The association claims that the high court communicated its decision orally through the Registrar General on August 22, 2025, without providing a written copy of its ruling. Instead, the association received informal information stating that the request was either on hold or rejected, citing a lack of current necessity for the change.

In their petition, the judges’ association expressed concerns over what they describe as “step-motherly treatment” towards subordinate judicial officers, indicating that the high court’s negative response reflects an unfair attitude towards them. The association’s legal representative, senior advocate Ajit S Bhasme, argued for parity with judicial officers in Telangana, where the retirement age for district judges has already been raised to 61 years in accordance with the Supreme Court’s earlier clarifications.

Bhasme emphasized that the association is not seeking an increase to 62 years but only to 61 years, aligning with the situation in Telangana. The Supreme Court noted that there is no legal obstacle to permitting the state of Madhya Pradesh to raise the retirement age, contingent upon the high court’s administrative decision.

The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for this matter in two weeks, allowing the Madhya Pradesh High Court to reconsider its position regarding the retirement age of its judicial officers. The Madhya Pradesh Judges Association had initially approached the Supreme Court in 2018, requesting an increase in the retirement age from 60 to 62 years but has since narrowed its request to 61 years, citing the precedent set by the Telangana High Court.

The high court had previously denied the request based on a 2002 Supreme Court judgment in the All India Judges Association case, which it interpreted as prohibiting such an enhancement. However, the Supreme Court recently addressed the case involving Telangana and confirmed that there is no impediment to increasing the retirement age, which may influence the outcome for the Madhya Pradesh judges.

The Supreme Court’s engagement in this matter highlights the ongoing discussions surrounding judicial reforms and the treatment of judicial officers across different states, reflecting broader implications for the legal community in India.