Case Title: All India Judges Association v. Union of India & Ors
Case No: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 643 of 2015
Decided on: 4th January, 2024
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA DR D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J B PARDIWALA AND HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA
Facts of the Case
The States, Union Territories, and Union Government argued that implementing the revised rates or new allowances would impose a greater financial burden and expenditure. They insisted on following the rules governing allowance payments set by each State for their administrative establishments. Additionally, they emphasized the need for judicial officers’ benefits to be comparable to those provided to other government officers.
Issue
The primary issue in this case is the approval of allowances for judicial officers and retired judicial officers, as recommended by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC). It involves ensuring uniform service conditions, and establishing oversight committees for implementation.
Court’s analysis and decision
In a writ petition addressing the allowances granted to judicial officers and retired judicial officers by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC), a three-Judge bench comprising Dr. DY Chandrachud, CJI, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, JJ, accepted the recommendations of SNJPC. The bench instructed the formation of a ‘Committee for Service Conditions of the District Judiciary’ in each High Court to supervise the implementation of SNJPC’s recommendations. Additionally, it mandated that the calculations and disbursements of arrears for salary, pension, and allowances owed to judicial officers, retired judicial officers, and family pensioners should be completed and distributed by February 29, 2024.
The Court observed that the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC) recommended certain changes in allowances, introducing two new allowances and incorporating two additional components into an existing allowance. These changes include Children Education Allowance, a Furniture and Air conditioner allowance as part of the House Rent Allowance, and Risk Allowance. The SNJPC proposed discontinuing the City Compensatory Allowance and rejected the demand for a Robe Allowance.
The Court emphasized the state’s responsibility to ensure that the working and post-retirement conditions for judicial officers align with the requirement for maintaining dignified working conditions. It stated that the state has an obligation to guarantee dignified work conditions for its judicial officers and cannot cite financial burden or expenditure as a defense.
The Bench highlighted that the allowances recommended by the SNJPC are fundamental and comparable to those available to officers in All-India Services performing executive functions. Expressing concern, the Court noted that while officers in other services experienced revisions in their service conditions since January 1, 2016, similar issues for judicial officers are still pending a final decision even after eight years. Some judges have retired, and the resolution is awaited, including for family pensioners of those who have passed away.
Ensuring consistency in the service conditions of judicial officers nationwide is imperative. The Court emphasized that it would be inappropriate to draw parallels between judicial service and the service of other state officers. The roles, responsibilities, limitations, and obligations during and after service are unique for members of the judicial service.
The Court emphasized the need for establishing a framework within each High Court to institutionalize the implementation of its orders regarding the service conditions of the district judiciary and the recommendations of the SNJPC.
Consequently, the Court directed the formation of a ‘Committee for Service Conditions of the District Judiciary’ in each High Court to oversee the implementation of SNJPC recommendations. The Committee’s composition would include:
- Two Judges of the High Court nominated by the Chief Justice, with one having prior experience in the district judiciary.
- The Law Secretary/Legal Remembrancer.
- The Registrar General of the High Court, serving as the ex officio Secretary of the Committee.
- A retired judicial officer in the cadre of District Judge nominated by the Chief Justice, acting as a nodal officer for day-to-day grievance redressal.
The senior Judge nominated by the Chief Justice would chair the Committee, with the option to co-opt officers of the State Government, including Secretaries in relevant departments, for discussions on pertinent issues. The Committee could also invite the Accountant General at its discretion to ensure the proper implementation of SNJPC recommendations and consult with representatives of Judges’ Association or Retired Judges’ Association.
The Court outlined the principal functions of the Committee and directed the formulation of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) with specified timelines for claims and disbursal of allowances, including arrears of salary and pension. The SOP would cover various aspects such as the nodal agency for disbursement, reimbursement procedures, contact details, publication on the High Court’s website, and maintenance of a database of retired Judges and family pensioners in the district judiciary.
The Court further instructed that the Committees for Service Conditions of the District Judiciary (CSCDJs), established based on previous directions, should monitor compliance. Each Committee working under the High Court was mandated to submit its report to the Court through the Registrar General by April 7, 2024.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Afshan Ahmad
