At present the judges of the Apex Court retire at the age of 65, whereas the judges of High courts and the members of the ITAT retire at the age of 62. Most of the judges of the Apex Court even after retirement render service to the nation by accepting the responsibility as chairman of various forums where the age Limit is 68. Similarly the judges of the High Courts also serve as Chairman, president or members of various quasi-judicial forums, like, the Administrative Tribunals, Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, SEBI Tribunal, etc, where the age limit is 65. When the judges can render service as Chairman of various forum and do the same work which otherwise they were doing as a judge, there is no reason why the age limit should not be raised. If the Government can retain the services of judges for another three years, it will be a great service to the nation, which can help to reduce the pendency of cases before High Courts.
 

The Chairman of Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, President of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chairman of Securities Appellate Tribunal are retiring at the age of 65, hence, it is the time to debate on the proposal of the increase of the age limit of the Supreme Court judges from 65 to 68, High Court judges and members of the ITAT from 62 to 65. The Federation has sent a representation earlier to increase the age limit of judges of Apex Court, High Courts and Members of ITAT.
 

Very recently, in the case of P.C. Chacko vs. UOI (2007) 213 E.L.T. 183 (CAT) the administrative Tribunal observed that, once Chief Justice retires and takes the position as Chairman of Central Excise and Customs, the status of Chief Justice is not carried by a person, when after retirement, he takes up a different assignment in different capacity. According to Government the Revenue Secretary is superior or of higher cadre than the President of CESTAT (Though the President is retired Chief Justice), the Revenue Secretary can review the adverse remark in ACR of a member by President CESTAT. This being the view of the Government. According to us, the retired judges should not be appointed as Chairman of any quasi-judicial authority, which makes them to report to secretary to Government of India. Therefore, it is desirable to increase the age limit. According to us, even the Chairman of Authority for Advance Rulings should be a sitting judge of High Court and not the retired judge of Supreme Court.