RAGHUNANDAN

SWARUP PATHAK
25 November 1924 -17 November 2007

INTRODUCTION

Raghunandan Swarup Pathak, (R. S. Pathak)

born on 25 November 1924 in Bareli .
He was the 18thChief Justice of India, the
son ofGopal Swarup Pathak, a formerVice
President of India.
Educated at St. Joseph's High School,
Allahabad.
Then went to Ewing Christian College,
Allahabad; Allahabad University.
Enrolled as an Advocate of the Allahabad
High Court on November 8, 1948.

OFFICE

Practised at Allahabad in Constitutional Law,

Income-tax, Sales Tax and other Taxation Laws; Civil
Law, Company Law and Industrial Disputes cases.
Appointed as an Additional Judge of the Allahabad
High Court for a period of two years with effect
from October 1, 1962.
Appointed permanent Judge of that High Court on
July 23, 1963.
Appointed Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High
Court on March 18, 1972.
Appointed Judge of the Supreme Court of India on
February 20, 1978, taken over as Chief Justice of
India on December 21, 1986.

Became 18th Chief Justice on 21 December 1986. He is

remembered as a judge who was a man of the middle
and was able to bring relative peace to the Court. He
served as Chief justice for two and a half years during
which time a dozen judges were appointed to the
Court.
Relinquished the office of the Chief Justice of India on
18.06.1989 on appointment as Judge, International
Court of Justice.
He was one of the two judges from India to have been
on theInternational Court of JusticeinThe Hague.
Within three months of his retirement Pathak became
a member of the International Court of Justice atThe
Hague.

JUDGEMENTS

Bhopal gas tragedy:

Pathak facilitated an out of court settlement
betweenUnion Carbide Corporationand
theGovernment of Indiain 1989 regarding the
compensation to be paid for theBhopal gas
tragedy. The government had sought $3.3 billion
but received only $470 million and the
settlement resulted in the dropping ofcriminal
liabilitycharges against Carbide in the case. The
Supreme Court in 1991 upheld the settlement in
1991 thus ending Carbide's liability in the case.

S.P. Sampat Kumar v. Union Of India

In the case of recruitment to the Central Administrative Tribunal the
appropriate course would be to appoint a High Powered Selection
Committee headed by a sitting Judge of the Supreme Court to be
nominated by the Chief Justice of India
While in the case of recruitment to the State Administrative Tribunals
the High Powered Selection Committee should be headed by a sitting
Judge of the High Court to be nominated by the Chief Justice of the
High Court concerned.
The contention that an advocate will not have the administrative
experience which is required for a Member of the Administrative
Tribunal cannot be accepted. An advocate who is qualified to be a
Judge of the High Court is an advocate who by implication is qualified
to perform not only the judicial duties but the administrative functions
which a High Court Judge is expected to discharge. Whether an
advocate applying for recruitment to the Administrative Tribunal has
sufficient administrative potential can be examined and judged during
the process of selection.