Case Law
Subject : Service Law - Pay and Allowances
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday took a firm stance against the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) for granting only prospective effect to the approved salary hike for its Law Researchers, questioning why the government did not implement the raise from the date recommended by the High Court's Chief Justice.
A division bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta has directed the Additional Chief Secretary of the Finance Department, GNCTD, to file an affidavit explaining why the enhancement should not be effective from 1st October 2022, as originally proposed by the High Court.
The writ petition, filed by Rushant Malhotra and other Law Researchers, sought the implementation of the recommended enhancement of their monthly remuneration. The High Court, through a committee decision dated 16th August 2023, approved by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, had recommended revising the remuneration from ₹65,000 to ₹80,000 per month, with retrospective effect from 1st October 2022.
Following an assurance given in court, the GNCTD's Council of Ministers approved the pay hike in its meeting on 2nd September 2025. However, the government made the enhancement effective from the date of the cabinet decision (2nd September 2025), not the retrospectively recommended date.
The counsel for the petitioners invoked Article 229 of the Constitution of India , which empowers the Chief Justice of a High Court to decide the terms and conditions of service for the court's officers and staff, with the state's approval required only for financial matters.
The government, represented by Mr. Reetesh Singh, Principal Secretary (Law, Justice & LA), submitted that while the pay hike was approved, the payment of arrears from October 2022 was not, due to objections from the Finance Department.
The Court, however, highlighted a previous instance where a similar pay enhancement for Law Researchers was implemented retrospectively. An order from 6th December 2023 in another case showed that the government had cleared arrears for previous hikes (from ₹35,000 to ₹50,000 and subsequently to ₹65,000) as per the High Court's recommendations.
"...it is seen from the documents on record that the Committee of this Court, as also the Hon’ble Chief Justice, in the meeting dated 16th August, 2023, had approved the revision of remuneration of Law Researchers from Rs. 65,000/- to Rs. 80,000/- w.e.f. 1st October 2022. While the said enhancement has now been approved... the date from when the approval has been granted is 2nd September 2025..."
During the hearing, the Court also disposed of an application by Law Researchers from the Delhi Judicial Academy who sought to be impleaded in the current petition to claim their own remuneration arrears. The Court directed them to file a separate writ petition, as the subject matter of the present case was distinct.
Citing the constitutional provision and the past precedent, the High Court has put the onus on the GNCTD's Finance Department to justify its decision. The bench ordered:
"In view of the aforesaid, as also the previous precedent in mind, let the Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, GNCTD, file an affidavit as to why the decision of the Committee of this Court shall not be given effect from 1st October, 2022."
The matter is scheduled for its next hearing on 10th October 2025 , when the affidavit is expected to be on record. The outcome of this case will be significant in clarifying the extent of the executive's discretion in financial matters concerning High Court administration, particularly when pitted against the recommendations of the judiciary under Article 229.
#DelhiHighCourt #LawResearchers #Article229
Vague 'Bad Work' Can't Presume Penetrative Sexual Assault Under POCSO Section 4 Without Evidence: Patna High Court
28 Apr 2026
Limiting Crop Damage Compensation to Specific Wild Animals Excluding Birds Violates Article 14: Bombay HC
28 Apr 2026
Appeal Limitation in 1991 Police Rules Yields to Uttarakhand Police Act 2007 on Inconsistency: Uttarakhand HC
28 Apr 2026
Nashik Court Reserves Verdict on Khan's TCS Bail Plea
29 Apr 2026
Delhi Court Grants Bail to I-PAC Director in PMLA Case
30 Apr 2026
No Historic Record of Saraswati Temple Demolition, Muslim Body Tells MP High Court in Bhojshala Dispute
30 Apr 2026
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.