No rule to use ‘justice’ before judges’ names: Justice Dept

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, November 10

It’s official! There is no “justice” for the judges under the law. In response to a query under the Right to Information Act, the Union Department of Justice has asserted there is “no such rule or law in this matter”.

The response came to a query by a lawyer, who has been trying to ascertain whether the Constitution permits the use of word “justice” as a prefix before the names of Supreme Court and high court judges.

The department asserted: “This has been the practice for a long time. In case of a fresh appointment, the prefix “justice” is not used in the warrant (of appointment). When the serving additional judge is appointed a permanent judge, the prefix “justice” has been used in the warrant.”

The reply goes on to add that an appeal under Section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, could be preferred within 30 days in case the applicant, Hemant Kumar, was not satisfied with the reply.

In its response to an application filed earlier under the RTI Act by advocate Hemant Kumar, the Supreme Court had said: “It is beyond the jurisdiction and scope of duties of the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Supreme Court of India, under the Right to Information Act, 2005, to interpret the law, to give explanation, opine, comment or advise on matters, etc. Your request is not covered under Section 2(f) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and cannot be acceded to that extent.”

This is not the first time that information was sought on the subject. Information suggests the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court had dismissed a plea seeking a ban on the use of prefix “justice”.

Hemant had initially filed an online RTI application with the Department of Justice under the Union Law Ministry. The plea was transferred to the Supreme Court CPIO. Two other RTI pleas preferred by him to the Prime Minister’s Office and the President of India secretariat were initially transferred to the Department of Justice before being forwarded to the apex court’s CPIO.

In his RTI query, Hemant had asked whether the prefix “justice” was a title within the meaning of Article 18(1) of the Constitution or was it an academic or a military title. His argument was that the state under the Article could confer only military or academic title upon its citizens.