Title: The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors v Association of Retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges at Allahabad & Ors
Citation: Civil Appeal Nos 23-24 of 2024 Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos. 8575-8576 of 2023
Dated on: 3.1.2024
Corum: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, CJI
Facts of the case
The present case Is a civil appeal before the supreme court of India involving contempt of court by some of the officials of the Uttar Pradesh Government. The officials present in the court, including the Secretary (Finance) and Special Secretary (Finance) were taken into custody and bailable warrants were issued against the Chief Secretary and the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance). The current case arose over pension and other benefits of the retired judges of the Allahabad HC which the state government was directed to grant by the supreme court. Through the merits the Supreme court realised that the state government failed to comply with the orders of Supreme court and without a valid reason filed the state government filed for a recall application. It was observed by the supreme court that the Allahabad HC had erred in initiating criminal and taking them into custody in the contempt proceeding as there was no evidence of scandalous or obstructive conduct on their part. The Supreme Court also issued some guidelines for the High Courts to follow while directing the personal presence of government officials in court proceedings, such as giving due notice, recording reasons, and allowing video conferencing.
Legal provision
In this present case Article 229 of the Indian Constitution deals with the appointments, conditions of service, and expenses of the officers and servants of the High Courts. It also gives the Chief Justice of the High Court the power to make rules for the purpose, subject to the approval of the Governor of the State. Article 229 is mentioned in the case because it is the main legal issue involved in the case. The Supreme Court has to decide whether the High Court was justified in invoking Article 229 to frame rules for the post-retiral benefits of its former judges, and whether the State government was bound to comply with them. Therefore, the High Court acted beyond its jurisdiction under Article 226 by frequently summoning officers to expedite the consideration of the Rules and issuing directions to notify the Rules by a fixed date, under the threat of criminal contempt.
Court analysis and judgement
The Supreme Court ruled that the High Court erred in ordering the State of Uttar Pradesh to notify the Rules pertaining to the post-retiral benefits of former High Court judges because the Chief Justice lacked the authority to make such rules under Article 229 of the Constitution. The High Court did not have the authority to order the notification of the Rules that the Chief Justice had proposed. The Chief Justice’s proposed Rules go beyond the provisions of the Constitution. The Chief Justice’s proposed Rules, according to the Supreme Court, go beyond the bounds of the Constitution because they attempt to grant former High Court judges benefits that are not permitted by any legislation passed by the Union government or Parliament and that run counter to the values of judicial accountability and independence.
“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- Namitha Ramesh
Click here to view the judgement
