The Supreme Court of India raised concerns about states prioritizing financial schemes over judicial officers’ pay during a hearing on a plea by the All India Judges Association. The Court questioned government priorities amid the freebie culture and emphasized the need for financial independence and better salaries to diversify and maintain an efficient judiciary.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday (Jan 7th) raised serious concerns about States prioritizing freebies over addressing the financial needs of the judiciary. The remark came during a hearing on a plea by the All India Judges Association regarding better pay and pensions for judicial officers.
A Bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih questioned the government’s financial priorities, especially in light of political schemes like Maharashtra’s Ladli Behna Yojna and pre-election promises by parties in Delhi.
“The States have all the money for the people who don’t do any work. When we talk about financial constraints, we also have to look at this. Come elections, you declare Ladli Behna and other new schemes where you pay fixed amounts. In Delhi, we have announcements now from some party or the other saying they will pay Rs 2,500 if they come to power,”
Justice Gavai remarked.
The observation came after Attorney General for India (AG) R. Venkataramani argued that financial constraints should be considered when deciding the pay and pensions of judicial officers. The AG referred to the freebie culture as an “aberration” and emphasized the financial burden on the State exchequer.
Concerns About Judicial Pay and Pensions
The plea filed in 2015 highlights the meager pensions and salaries of district judges in India, even for those elevated to High Courts. The Court has expressed concerns over the years about the lack of financial independence for judges, emphasizing that it undermines the efficiency and independence of the judiciary.
Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Parameshwar K argued for the judiciary’s say in service conditions despite Article 309 of the Constitution granting the executive and legislature the power to decide them. He cited the doctrine of inherent powers, emphasizing its necessity to ensure an efficient and independent justice system.
The Need for Diversity in the Judiciary
Parameshwar further pointed out that better pay could help diversify the judiciary.
“If we want a more diversified judiciary, I think we need to pay our judges better, take care of our judges better,”
he stated. He emphasized that financial independence would encourage first-generation lawyers and those from rural backgrounds to join the judiciary, leading to a more inclusive system.
Government’s Response
The AG defended the government’s financial approach, explaining that the New Pension Scheme accounted for long-term financial burdens. He highlighted that pension liabilities have significantly increased over time, making it crucial to consider fiscal constraints.
The AG also requested the Court to defer the hearing, hinting that the Centre might issue a notification to address the issues. However, the Court declined, noting the prolonged pendency of the matter.
“If any notification is issued after the hearings are over, the AG can inform the Court,”
the bench said.
The hearing will continue tomorrow, with the Court expected to deliberate on the financial independence and well-being of judicial officers, which is critical for a robust and impartial justice delivery system.
Stay tuned for updates on this case!
Case Title – All India Judges Association v. Union of India & Ors.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES