Today, On 5th November, The Supreme Court asserted that judges of all High Courts should receive equal salaries and pensions. This directive came during a hearing on unresolved issues concerning overdue salaries and pension matters affecting judges of the Patna High Court. The Court highlighted the need for uniform compensation across High Courts, emphasizing that consistent pay and benefits are essential to uphold equity within the judiciary.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court emphasized that all High Court judges form a single, unified class of officeholders and therefore should receive equal service benefits, including pensions, without any disparity.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra raised concerns about why judges across High Courts receive varying pension amounts.
Read Also: District Judge’s Dowry Demand & Trying to Influence Junior Judge | HC Upholds Dismissal
The Court stated,
“Article 216 makes no distinction in the appointment process for High Court judges. Once appointed, all judges hold equal standing within the High Court. The institution comprises the Chief Justice and all other judges, with no justification for differences in salary or other benefits,”
The Supreme Court addressed issues concerning the delayed salaries of Patna High Court judges and related pension concerns, specifically mentioning the case of Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra, who had gone without salary for ten months due to the lack of a General Provident Fund (GPF) account.
The Court reiterated that any disparities in service benefits would compromise the homogeneity of the High Court judiciary.
the Court emphasized.
“There can be no variation in the payment of salaries or other benefits for judges, similar to the principles applied to civil servants. Salaries come from the consolidated fund of States, while pensions are drawn from the Consolidated Fund of India. The principle of non-discrimination must apply uniformly to both sitting and retired judges,”
The Court made the following determinations:
- High Courts are constitutional bodies, and all judges serve as protectors of constitutional roles.
- Article 221(1) and Article 221(2) of the Constitution do not allow for any discrimination regarding the salaries received by judges.
- Once appointed to the High Court, all judges belong to a single, uniform category of officeholders.
- There is a fundamental connection between judicial independence and financial autonomy.
- Any decisions regarding service benefits for sitting judges and pension benefits for retirees must be made without discrimination.
- Attempting to create any distinctions in this regard would be unconstitutional.
Read Also: Centre Nods for Gauhati HC Judge; SC Expunges Remarks Against Judge
The directive also serves as a reminder to the state governments regarding their obligations to judges, emphasizing that judicial remuneration and benefits should not be subject to administrative delays or lapses, as was seen in Justice Mishra’s case. In September, the Court had directed the State of Bihar to ensure that his pending salary was released promptly.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s ruling reinforces the need for a streamlined, consistent approach to judicial benefits across states. It underscores that equitable pay and benefits are essential not only to support the personal welfare of judges but also to preserve the judiciary’s impartiality and uphold the public’s confidence in the nation’s legal institutions.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
