Chief Justice has no "unfettered" powers: SC

New Delhi, Sept 14(PTI) The Indian Supreme Court
Wednesday ruled no government or authority, including the
"Chief Justice", has any "unfettered discretion" or
"unaccountable action" and any such exercise is subject to
judicial review.
A bench of justices R V Raveendran and Markandeya Katju
held that in a democracy where the rule of law prevails, even
the prerogative power is subject to judicial review.
"At the outset, we may note that in a democracy, governed
by rule of law, where arbitrariness in any form is eschewed,
no government or authority has the right to do whatever it
pleases.
"Where rule of law prevails, there is nothing like
unfettered discretion or unaccountable action. Even
prerogative power is subject to judicial review, but to a very
limited extent," Justice Raveendran, writing the judgement,
said.
The apex court passed the ruling while upholding an
appeal filed by West Bengal government challenging a decision
of the Calcutta High Court Chief Justice to grant additional
pay benefits to about 50 employees of the high court even
though the government rules did not permit them.
The Chief Justice had passed the said order in 2003
after a three-judge committee suggested the increased pay
structure as one Gopinath Dey, a junior lower division clerk,
was erroneously given higher pay over the other employees. The
idea behind the decision was to rectify the anomaly.
When the government's Pay & Accounts Department raised
objection, a single judge of the high court set aside the
Chief Justice's administrative order. However, a division
bench quashed the single judge's order and ruled that the
Chief Justice's power was equivalent to that of the State
Governor and hence not subject to judicial review.
Aggrieved, the State had appealed in the apex court.
Rejecting the high court's view, the apex court said the
extent, depth and intensity of judicial review may depend
on the subject matter involved.
"The fact that in regard to certain types of action or
orders of Chief Justice, the scope of judicial review may be
very narrow and limited is different from saying that an order
of the Chief Justice granting certain relief to High Court
employees whose service conditions are governed by rules, is
not justiciable. Such orders are justiciable.
"It is, therefore, clear that the Chief Justice has the
power and authority to grant premature increments in
exceptional circumstances. But the Chief Justice cannot grant
such relief in an irrational or arbitrary manner. If the rules
provide that premature increments could be granted in
exceptional circumstances, there should be a reference to the
existence of exceptional circumstances and application of mind
to those exceptional circumstances," the apex court said.
In the present case, the apex court said neither the
recommendation considered by the Chief Justice nor the order
of the Chief Justice referred to any exceptional circumstance
and did not even refer to the rule relating to grant of relief
in exceptional circumstances.
"In view of the above, none of the seniors was entitled
to any relief with reference to the pay of their junior
Gopinath Dey. We therefore, allow these appeals, set aside the
order of the division bench and restore the order of the
learned Single Judge," the apex court said.