SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(SC) 1530

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J. CHELAMESWAR, S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ.
All India Judges Association - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 643 of 2015
Decided on : 09-05-2017

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Gourab Banerji, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi and Mr. Vyom Raghuvanshi, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. ANS Nadkarni, ASG, Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Ms. Sunita Rani Singh, Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Mr. Raj Singh Rana, Mr. Santosh Kumar, Mr. Umesh Babu Chaurasia, Mr. H. Khinchi, Mr. Santosh Rebello, Mr. Pranav Kumar, Ms. Archana P. Dave, Ms. Radhika Sharma, Mr. M.K. Maroria, Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, Mr. B.K. Prasad, A&N Administration Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Ms. G. Indira, Advocates, State of AP Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, Ms. Prerna Singh, Advocates, High Court of Bombay Mr. A.P. Mayee, Mr. A. Selvin Raja, Advocates, High Court of Chatisgarh Mr. Jugal Kishore Gilda, AG, Mr. A.P. Mayee, Advocates, HC of Chattisgarh Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Mr. V.C. Shukla, Advocates, High Court of Calcutta Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kunal Chatterji, Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Advocates, Delhi High Court Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Mr. A. Venkatesh, Mr. Sudipto Sircar, Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocates, State of Gujarat Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Puja Singh, Ms. Mamta Singh, Advocates, State of Goa Mr. ANS Nadkarni, ASG, Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Mr. Salvador Santosh Rebello, Ms. Sneha Prabhu Tendulkar, Ms. Surekha raman, Ms. Nivedita Nair, Ms. Niharika, Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Advocates, HC of Gauhati Mr. P.I. Jose, Mr. Shashank Mishra, Advocates, State of HP Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, Mr. Yugal K. Prasad, Ms. Parul Sharma, Advocates, HC of J&K Mr. Bharat Sangal, Advocates, State of Jharkhand Mr. Ajit Kr. Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. V.V.V.M.B.N.S. Pattabhi Ram, Mr. Shashank Singh, Mr. Vishal Arun, Advocates, HC of Jharkhand Mr. Krishnanand Pandeya, Advocates, State of Karnataka Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, Advocates, HC of Madras Mr. A. Radha Krishnan, HC of MP Mr. C.D. Singh, Mr. Prateek Rana, Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Advocates, State of Manipur Mr. Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Mr. Naresh Kr. Gaur, Mr. M.N. Singh, Mr. Ashok Kr. Singh, Advocates, HC of Manipur Ms. Sneha Kalita, Mr. Subro Sanyal, Advocates, HC of Meghalaya Mr. Aman Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Advocates, State of Maharashtra Mr. Kunal A. Cheema, Mr. Yogesh K. Ahirrao, Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, Advocates, State of Nagaland Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Mr. Edward Belho, Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Mr. K. Luikang Michael, Ms. Elix Gangmei, Advocates, State of Odisha Mr. Krishnayan Sen, Mr. Ankit Jain, Advocates, State of Punjab Mr. Saurabh Ajay Gupta, AAG, Mr. Nishant Bishnoi, Govt. of Puducherry Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Advocate, Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Mr. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Advocates, State of Rajasthan Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Mr. Adhiraj Singh, Mr. Arjun Singh, Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Ms. Mukul Kumar, Advocates, State of Sikkim Mr. A. Mariarputham, AG, Ms. Aruna Mathur, Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Mr. Amit Arora, M/s. Arputham Aruna & Co., State of Telangana Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, Advocates, High Court of Tripura Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Advocates, State of UP Mr. Aviral Saxena, Mr. Ardhendumauli Kr. Prasad, Mr. Abhisth Kumar, Advocates, State of Uttarakhand Mr. Tanmaya Agarwal, Ms. Rachna Srivastava, Advocates, High Court of Uttarakhand Mr. Mukesh K. Giri, AAG, Ms. Rachana Srivasava, Advocates, State of WB Mr. Soumitra G.Chaudhri, Mr. Chanchal K. Ganguli, Mr. Sudhanshu S. Chaudhari, Ms. Surabhi Guleria, Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, Mr. Nikhil Goel, Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguly, Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Mr. Suryanarayana Singh, Mr. Parijat Sinha, Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, Mr. Devendra Singh, Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra, Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Ms. Archana Mishra, Advocates.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the court to appoint a Commission to review the service conditions of judicial officers and the scope of the Commission's responsibilities, including the evolution of principles for pay and other emoluments, examination of present structures, and recommendation of interim relief.

Headnote:

Writ Petition - All India Judicial Commission - [Terms of Reference: a, b, d, e, f] - The court appointed a Commission to review the service conditions of judicial officers of subordinate judiciary in India, including pay scale, retirement age, pension, and other emoluments. The Commission was tasked with evolving principles for the structure of pay and other emoluments, examining the present structure of emoluments and conditions of service, and recommending interim relief for judicial officers of all states/union territories. It was also directed to recommend a mechanism for setting up a permanent mechanism to review the pay and service conditions of members of the subordinate judiciary periodically.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petition was filed by All India Judges Association seeking the constitution of an All India Judicial Commission to review the service conditions of judicial officers of subordinate judiciary in India.

Finding of the Court:

The court ordered the appointment of a Commission, headed by a former Judge of the Supreme Court and a former Judge of the Kerala High Court, to review the service conditions and make recommendations within 18 months.

Issues: Constitution of All India Judicial Commission, review of service conditions of judicial officers, appointment of Commission members, terms of reference, and timeline for recommendations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found it necessary to appoint a Commission to collect data and make recommendations for the review of service conditions of judicial officers, considering the need for evolving principles for pay and other emoluments, examining the present structure of emoluments and conditions of service, and recommending interim relief.

Final Decision: The court directed the appointment of a Commission and outlined the terms of reference, composition, financial implications, and timeline for recommendations.

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed by All India Judges Association praying as follows:-

"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased :

1. To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other writ/order/direction as may be necessary directing the Respondents to constitute all India Judicial Commission in terms of the representation made by the petitioner to respondent no. 1 on 13/05/2015 to review the service conditions of the judicial officers of subordinate judiciary in India including but not limited to pay scale, retirement age, pension and other emoluments of the sub-ordinate judiciary from time to time;

2. To issue such orders as may be necessary to direct the Respondent no. 1 to undertake appropriate exercise to ascertain the feasibility of establishing an All India Judicial Services; and

3. To pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case."

2. Notice was ordered on 14.9.2015. Various States and High Courts, and the Union of India are the parties-respondents to the instant writ petition. All the respondents are served.

3. By an order dated 8th March, 2017, this Court recorded that for adjudicating the various questions raised by the petitioners in the instant writ petition, certain data is required to be collected and for that purpose, a body competent to collect the data is required to be constituted. The Court also took note of the fact that, on an earlier occasion, such an exercise was undertaken pursuant to the orders of this Court by a Commission, now popularly known as the Shetty Commission. On the basis of the recommendations of the Shetty Commission, this Court issued various directions, the details of which may not be necessary for the present purpose.

4. All the learned counsel appearing for the various parties agreed for appointment of a fresh Commission to undertake the exercise. It was also recorded by the order dated 8th March, 2017 that the Government of India would submit draft Terms of Reference for the guidance of the Commission, to be appointed eventually. Government of India has since filed the draft Terms of Reference. Learned counsel for the petitioner also agrees that the various suggestions made in the said draft be the terms and reference to the Commission. The agreed Terms of Reference are as follows :-

a. To evolve the principles which should govern the structure of pay and other emoluments of Judicial Officers belonging to the sub-ordinate judiciary all over the country.

b. To examine the present structure of emoluments and conditions of service of Judicial Officers in the states and UT's taking into account the total packet of benefits available to them and make suitable recommendations including post retirement benefits such as pension etc. having regard among other relevant factors, to the existing relativities in the pay structure between the officers belonging to sub-ordinate judicial services vis-a-vis other civil servant and mechanism for redressal of grievances in this regard.

c. ... x x x x ...

d. To examine the work methods and work environment as also the variety of allowance and benefits in kind that are available in Judicial Officers in addition to pay and to suggest rationalisation and simplification thereof with a view to promoting efficiency in Judicial Administration, optimising the size of judiciary etc. and to remove anomalies created in implementation of earlier recommendations.

e. To consider and recommend such interim relief as it considers just and proper to all categories of Judicial Officers of all the States/Union Territories. The interim relief, if recommended, shall have to be fully adjusted against and included in the package which may become admissible to the Judicial Officers on the final recommendations of the Commission.

f. To recommend the mechanism for setting up of a permanent mechanism to review the pay and service conditions of members of s











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top