SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, JJ.
All India Judges Association & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1022 of 1989
Decided On : 07-02-2023
Fact of the Case:
The court addressed non-compliance by certain state governments in disbursing pension arrears to retired judicial officers.Finding of the Court:
The court directed non-compliant state governments to file affidavits or face contempt proceedings, granting a final opportunity for compliance.Issues:
Non-compliance with court directions on pension arrears disbursement by certain state governments.Ratio Decidendi:
Emphasizing the importance of actual disbursement, the court granted a final opportunity for compliance before contemplating contempt proceedings.Final Decision:
Non-compliant state governments were given a final chance to file affidavits on compliance or face personal appearance in court and potential contempt action.ORDER
I.A. NO.91009/2022 in I.A. NO. 88342/2022
1. These applications be placed before the Three Judge Bench, in accordance with the orders passed by this Court on 10.01.2023 in I.A. No.73015/2021 etc.
2. The Registry is, therefore, directed to place these matters before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for obtaining appropriate orders.
I.A. No. 23985/2023
3. Issue notice, returnable on 28.02.2023, to the Union of India through Ministry of Law and Justice and Delhi High Court through its Registrar General.
4. In addition to the usual mode, liberty is granted to the applicant(s) to serve notice through the Central Agency/Standing Counsel for the Delhi High Court.
I.A. Nos. 121642/2018, I.A. No.5933/23 in I.A. NO.121642/2018, I.A. No.162247/2018, 162248/2018, 162199/2018, and 162201/2018
5. Vide order dated 10.01.2023 passed in I.A. Nos.121642/2018 etc., this Court has specifically recorded that merely issuance of notification of revision in pension is not sufficient, what is necessary is that the arrears should actually be disbursed to the retired judicial officers.
6. We had, therefore, directed the Chief Secretaries of all the State Governments/Union Territories to file their affidavits on or prior to 03.02.2023, stating therein as to whether the amount has actually been disbursed to the retired judicial officers or not.
7. We have further clarified that if any State Government/Union Territory fails to comply with the said directions, the Court would be constrained to take action against the Chief Secretary of the State Governments/Union Territories for committing contempt of this Court.
8. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, various State Governments/Union Territories have filed their respective affidavits. The learned Amicus Curiae has placed on record a chart showing details about the State Governments/Union Territories who have complied with the directions and the State Governments/Union Territories who have not complied with the directions.
9. The chart would reveal that the States/Union Territories of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gurajat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Odisha, Tripura, Goa, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Andaman and Nicobar, Chandigarh and various other Union Territories have complied with the directions issued by this Court.
10. We appreciate the State Governments/Union Territories, who have filed their respective affidavit, in compliance of the directions issued by this Court.
11. Insofar as the State of Chhattisgarh is concerned, though the affidavit filed by it is not clear as it ought to have been, Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, learned counsel appearing for the State of Chhattisgarh, on instructions, makes a categorical statement that the actual disbursement has in fact been made.
12. It would thus reveal that it is the State Governments of Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Manipur, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, NCT of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Sikkim, Telangana and Uttrakhand who have not filed their respective affidavit, as directed by this Court.
13. When a specific direction was issued to the State Governments/Union Territories to file a specific affidavit, as to whether actual disbursement has been made or not, non-compliance of the said directions could have been construed seriously and we could have proceeded to take action against the respective Chief Secretaries.
14. We may specify that insofar as the State of Jharkhand is concerned, the stand taken is totally unwarranted. A retired judicial officer cannot be expected to make an application to the Accountant General for revision of pension. All the papers pertaining to the service rendered by a Judicial Officer is always available with the employer.
15. Shri Tapesh Kumar Singh, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Jharkhand, states that there is some problem at the end of the Accountant General and the office of the Accountant General is not under the control of the State Government.
16. When a specific directi
The court affirmed that compliance with its directives by the concerned authorities negates the grounds for contempt.
Compliance with prior tribunal orders regarding pension increments validly determined by the court.
The denial of an opportunity to file a counter affidavit constitutes a violation of natural justice, necessitating the setting aside of the judgment.
The obligation for dearness relief payment to pensioners originates from judicial direction, not discretion, and must be adhered to within a reasonable timeframe.
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.