 bill  no 14  of  2017 the constitution (amendment) bill, 2017 by shrimati meenakashi lekhi, mp a billfurther to amend the constitution of indiabe it enacted by parliament in the sixty-eighth  year of the republic of india as follows:—1 (1) this act may be called the constitution (amendment) act, 2017short title and commencement(2) it shall come into force on such date as the central government may, by notificationin the official gazette, appointamendment of article 217words "sixty-five years" shall be substitutedamendment of article 2243 in article 224 of the constitution, in clause (3), for the words "sixty-two years", thewords "sixty-five years" shall be substituted statement of objects and reasonsclause (1) of article 217 of the constitution allows every judge of high court to hold office until he attains the age of sixty-two years clause (3) of article 224 of the constitution provides that no person appointed as an additional or acting judge of a high court shall hold office after attaining the age of sixty-two years the age of retirement of the high court judges, which was fixed at sixty years in the beginning, was enhanced to sixty-two years by the constitution (fifteenth amendment) act, 1963 since then, no revision has taken place in this regardthe department related parliamentary standing committee on personnel, public grievances, law and justice, in its 39th report dated the 29th april, 2010, has recommended to raise the retirement age of the judges of the high courts from sixty-two years to sixty-five years hence, in view of this it is expedient and necessary to enhance the age of the supreme court judges from sixty-two to sixty-five years further, most of the reasons adduced by the fifth central pay commission in support of its recommendation for increasing the age of retirement of the central government employees, such as global practices, increase in life expectancy, improved health standards, need for utilization of experience and wisdom of senior employees, etc would also apply to the judges besides this, after their retirement the judges are being appointed by government in various tribunals, appellate tribunals and other bodies which is antithesis and not in consonance with the spirit of the preamble of the constitution the increase in age of retirement will altogether stop the employment of judges after their retirementindependence of judiciary is an essential attribute of rule of law, which is a basic feature of the constitution judiciary must be free from all pressures including the pressures from executive as well as psychological pressure on the judges related to their future after retirement the judges are required to ensure the independence and impartiality of judiciary by keeping themselves free from any allurement of employment under the government after their retirementthe constitution of india, specifically prohibits the chairman of union public service commission and its members and the chairman of state public service commission and its members for further employment either under the government of india or under the government of any state the constitution of india, on the other hand nowhere restricts or prohibits retired chief justice and judges of the high courts to hold further employment either under the government of india or under any of the state governmentsarticle 148 (4) provides that the comptroller and auditor-general shall not be eligible for further office either under the government of india or under the government of any state after he has ceased to hold his officethe chief justice and judges of the various high courts, the comptroller and auditor general of india, the chairman of union public service commission, the chairman of the state public service commission and the members of these commissions are constitutional functionaries and they should be kept free from all kinds of allurement of employment under the government after cessation of their officeit is presumed that reappointment of judges would have effect of undermining the independence and fairness of judiciaryin view of the present state of vacancies of judges in high courts, it is extremely difficult to clear the heavy pendency of cases in the high courts increasing the age of retirement by three more years would restrict occurrence of new vacancies on account of superannuation  for the next three years during which time the existing backlog in vacancies could be cleared this would have a clear impact on reduction of pendency of cases in the high courtsit is, therefore, proposed to increase the age of retirement of judges and additional or acting judges of high courts to sixty-five yearshence the billnew delhi;meenakashi lekhinovember 23, 2016 annexure extract from the constitution of india   appointment and conditions of the office of a judge of a high court217 (1) every judge of a high court shall be appointed by the president by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with the chief justice of india, the governor of the state, and, in the case of appointment of a judge other than the chief justice, the chief justice of high court, shall hold office, in the case of an additional or acting judge, as provided in article 224, and in any other case, until he attains the age of sixty-two years:                                                                                                                                           224 (1)                                                                                                                             (2)                                                                                                                                      appointment of additional and acting judges(3) no person appointed as an additional or acting judge of a high court shall hold office after attaining the age of sixty-two years———— a billfurther to amend the constitution of india————(shrimati meenakashi lekhi, mp)gmgipmrnd—4060ls(s3)—31-01-2017