Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 29

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., J B Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, JJ.
All India Judges Association - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No 643 of 2015 With Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos 6471-6473 of 2020, 29232 of 2018 And With Contempt Petition (Civil) Nos 711 of 2022, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 of 2023, 848 of 2023 and 1338 of 2023 in Writ Petition (Civil) No 643 of 2015
Decided On : 04-01-2024

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. K.Parameshwar, AOR (Amicus Curiae) Ms. Kanti, Adv. Ms. Arti Gupta, Adv. Mr. MV Mukunda, Adv. Mr. Chinmay Kalgaonkar, Adv. Mr. Gourab Banerjee, Sr. Adv. Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi, AOR Mr. Vyom Raghuvanshi, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vp Singh, Adv. Mr. Venkata Supreeth, Adv. Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Deepak Prakash, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. K M Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Wasim Quadri, Sr. Adv. Dr. Reeta Vasishta, Adv. Mr. Mohd Akhil, Adv. Mrs. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv. Ms. Sonali Jain, Adv. Mr. Chitvan Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Kartikaya Aggrawal, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. K. M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, A.A.G. Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR Mr. Rushab Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Adv. Mr. Astik Gupta, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Sabharwal, Adv. Mr. Japnish Singh Bhatia, Adv. Mr. K.M Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Anmol Chandan, Adv. Mr. Vatsal Joshi, Adv. Mr. Annirudh Sharma-II, Adv. Mr. Ishaan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarawal, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Verma, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Varun Chugh, Adv. Ms. Mrinal Elkar Mazumdar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Karol, Adv. Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Adv. Mr. Shashwat Parihar, Adv. Mrs. Priyadarshini Priya, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Thakur, AOR Mrs. Geetanjali Bedi, Adv. Mr. Shivamm Sharrma, Adv. Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR Mr. Abhisek Mohanty, Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta, AOR Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, AOR Ms. Rucha A. Pande, Adv. Manish Mr. M. Veeraragavan, Adv. Ms. Gautami Yadav, Adv. Ms. Pranjal Chapalgaonkar, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, AOR Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv. Ms. Kshitij Singh, Adv. Mr. Apoorv Kurup, AOR Ms. Nidhi Mittal, Adv. Ms. Aparna Arun, Adv. Ms. Anchal, Adv. Mr. Akhil Hasija, Adv. Ms. Gauri Goburdhun, Adv. Ms. Kavita Jha, AOR Mr. Rajeev Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Aditeya Bali, Adv. Mr. P. I. Jose, AOR Mr. Anupam Mishra, Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, Adv. Mr. Maibam Nabaghanashyam Singh, AOR Mr. Amit Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, AOR Mr. Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Mrs. Shashi Pathak, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Goel, AOR Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Mr. Aditya Bhanu Neekhra, Adv. Mr. Aniket Patel, Adv. Mr. Anupam Raina, AOR Mr. Sunando Raha, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Palli, Adv. Mr. Nishant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Krishnanand Pandeya, AOR Mr. Dev Pratap Shahi, Adv. Mr. Raghavendra S. Srivatsa, AOR Mr. T. G. Narayanan Nair, AOR Mr. A. Radhakrishnan, AOR Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Niranjan Sahu, AOR Mr. Umakant Misra, Adv. Mr. Debabrata Dash, Adv. Mr. Abhijit Pattnaik, Adv. Ms. Apoorva Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Ms. Enakshi Mukhopadhyay Siddhanta, AOR Mr. Sovon Siddhanta, Adv. Mr. Saravanan A., Adv. Mr. J. Vasanthan, Adv. Mr. K.G. Kannan, Adv. Mr. Mukesh K. Giri, AOR Mr. Mandaar Mukesh Giri, Adv. Mr. Santosh Krishnan, AOR Ms. Deepshikha Sansanwal, Adv. Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR Mr. Kabir Shankar Bose, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar, AOR Mr. Mahesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, Adv. Mr. Nikhilesh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Jyoti Kumari, Adv. Ms. Devika Khanna, Adv. Mrs. V D Khanna, Adv. Mr. VMZ Chambers, AOR Mr. Abhay Anil Anturkar, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Tank, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Awalgaonkar, Adv. Ms. Surbhi Kapoor, AOR Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR Mr. B.K. Satija, A.A.G. Dr. Hemant Gupta, A.A.G. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Ms. Payal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Shivang Jain, Adv. Ms. Nitikaa Guptha, Adv. Ms. Monica Anand Kumar, Adv. Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv. Mr. Ravi Bakshi, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Rana, Adv. Ms. M. Venmani, Adv. Mr. S. Gowthaman, AOR Ms. Saima Firoze, Adv. Mr. Abhisar Thakral, Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Barun Kumar Sinha, A.A.G. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Shwetank Singh, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv. Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv. Mr. Abraham Mathew, Adv. Mr. Rebin Vincent Gralan, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Mishra, A.A.G. Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Raavi Sharma, Adv. Ms. Yamini Singh, Adv. Mr. Lenin Singh Hijam, Adv. Gen, Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Karun Shrama, Adv. Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv. Mr. R. Rajaselvan, Adv. Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR Mr. Nirnimesh Dube, AOR Mr. K N Balgopal Adv. Gen.Nagaland/Sr. Adv. Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR Ms. Limayinla Jamir, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Adv. Mr. Prang Newmai, Adv. Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR Mr. Gurminder Singh, Adv. Gen.Punjab/Sr. Adv. Mr. Karan Sharma, AOR Mr. Ajay Pal, Adv. Mr. Mohit Siwach, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, AOR Ms. Nishi Sangtani, Adv. Ms. Vani Vandana Chhetri, Adv. Ms. Zinnea Mehta, Adv. Mr. Naman Jain, Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, A.A.G. Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AOR Ms. Devyani Gupta, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Unnikrishnan, Adv. Mr. C Kranthi Kumar, Adv. Mr. Naman Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Danish Saifi, Adv. Ms. V Keerthana, Adv. Ms. Tanvi Anand, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Kumar Choudhry , AOR Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, AOR Mr. Sudarshan Singh Rawat, AOR Mr. Kuldeep Parihar, D.A.G. Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Ms. Saakshi Singh Rawat, Adv. Mr. S Sunil, Adv. Mr. Sunny Sachin Rawat, Adv. Mr. Parijat Sinha, AOR Ms. Madhumita Bhattacharjee, AOR Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Aravindh S., AOR Mr. Abbas, Adv. Mr. Ahantham Henry, Adv. Mr. Ahantham Rahen Singh, Adv. Mr. Mohan Singh, Adv. Mr. Kumar Mihir, AOR Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari, AOR Mr. T. V. Ratnam, AOR Mr. Ankur Kashyap, AOR Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joydip Roy, Adv. Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Karthik S.D., AOR Mr. Uday B. Dube, AOR Mr. Deepak Prakash, AOR Mr. Pawan Kr. Dabas, Adv. Mr. Kamal Singh Bisht, Adv. Mr. Raneev Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Vajpayee, Adv. Ms. Divyangna Malik, Adv. Ms. Merlyn J. Rachel, Adv. Ms. Vishnu Priya, Adv. Mr. Vardaan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Rahul Lakhera, Adv. Mr. Rahul Suresh, Adv. Mr. Sudhir Kumar Saxena, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aviral Saxena, AOR Mr. Piyush Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Mohammed Imran, Adv. Mr. Gautam Narayan, AOR Ms. Asmita Singh, Adv. Mr. Harshit Goel, Adv. Mr. Sujay Jain, Adv. Mr. K.V. Vibu Prasad, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Ritwick Parikh, Adv. Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv. Mr. R. Rajaselvan, Adv. Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sravan Kumar Karanam, Adv. Mr. Santhosh Kumar Puppala, Adv. Ms. Shireesh Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Pranali Tayade, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Judicial service is an integral and significant component of functions of State and contributes to constitutional obligation to sustain rule of law – Conditions of service while a Judge is in service must ensure a dignified existence – Post-retirement conditions of service have a crucial bearing on dignity and independence of office of a Judge and how it is perceived by society.

Headnote:
(A) Service Law – Service Conditions – Judicial service – Judicial service is an integral and significant component of functions of State and contributes to constitutional obligation to sustain rule of law – Judicial service is distinct in its characteristics and in terms of responsibilities which are cast upon officers of District Judiciary to render objective dispensation of justice to citizens – State is duty bound to ensure that conditions of service, both during tenure of office and after retirement, are commensurate with need to maintain dignified working conditions for serving judicial officers and in post-retirement emoluments made available to former members of judicial service – Work of a judicial officer is not confined merely to working hours rendered in course of judicial duties in court – Every judicial officer is required to work both before and after court working hours – Work of a Judge cannot be assessed solely in terms of their duties during court working hours – State is under an affirmative obligation to ensure dignified conditions of work for its judicial officers and it cannot raise defence of an increase in financial burden or expenditure – Conditions of service while a Judge is in service must ensure a dignified existence – Post-retirement conditions of service have a crucial bearing on dignity and independence of office of a Judge and how it is perceived by society – If service of judiciary is to be a viable career option so as to attract talent, conditions of service, both for working and retired officers, must offer security and dignity. (Paras 13 and 14)
(B) Service Law – Service Conditions – Judicial service – Revision of pay and pension for judicial officers in terms of Shetty Commission recommendations – Allowances which have been provided by SNJPC are basic allowances, most of which rank on same scale as what has been made available to officers discharging executive functions in All India Services – It is a matter of grave concern that though officers in other services have availed of a revision of their conditions of service as far back as 01 January 2016, similar issues pertaining to judicial officers are still awaiting a final decision eight years thereafter. Judges have retired from service – Family pensioners of those who have passed away are awaiting resolution as well – Unified judiciary necessarily entails that service conditions of Judges of one State are equivalent to similar posts of judges of other States – Efficient functioning necessarily requires Judges of calibre and capacity to be provided with right incentives and promotion opportunities to maintain high level of functioning of judiciary – There is a need to maintain uniformity in service conditions of judicial officers across country – Allowances as recommended by Second National Judicial Pay Commission [SNJPC]: –
House Building Advance (HBA) – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Children Education Allowance (CEA) – Recommendations of SNJPC approved.
City Compensatory Allowance (CCA) – Recommendations of SNJPC approved.
Concurrent Charges Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Conveyance/Transport Allowance (TP) – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Dearness Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Earned Leave Encashment – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Electricity and Water Charges – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Higher Qualification Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Hill Area/Tough Location Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Home Orderly/Domestic Help Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
House Rent Allowance and Residential Quarters – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Leave Travel Concession(LTC)/Home Travel Concession(HTC) – Recommendations of SNJPC partly accepted.
Medical Allowance/Medical Facilities – SNJPC has justifiably increased fixed medical allowance to Rs. 3,000 per month for serving judicial officers and to Rs. 4,000 per month to pensioners and family pensioners with effect from 01.01.2016 – There is no valid basis to distinguish between pensioners and family pensioners for payment of a fixed medical allowance – Moreover, increase of Rs. 1,000 per month for pensioners as compared to serving judicial officers is also justified considering fact that pensioners as a class would need more medical attention with advancing years.
Newspaper and Magazine Allowances – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Risk Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Robe Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Special Pay for Administrative Work – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Sumptuary Allowance – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Telephone Facility – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Transfer Grant – Recommendations of SNJPC accepted.
Committee in each High Court to be constituted for overseeing implementation of recommendations of SNJPC as approved by this Court – Committee shall be called Committee for Service Conditions of the District Judiciary [CSCDJ] – Directions issued. (Paras 15, 16, 17, 57 and 83)
Facts of the case:
By its orders dated 27 July 2022, 5 April 2023 and 19 May 2023, this Court has accepted recommendations of Second National Judicial Pay Commission1[“SNJPC”], chaired by Justice P V Reddy, former Judge of this Court of India on revision of pay and pension for judicial officers. This judgment pertains to allowances which have been granted to judicial officers and retired judicial officers by SNJPC.
Findings of Court:
All States and Union Territories shall now act in terms of above directions expeditiously. Disbursements on account of arrears of salary, pension and allowances due and payable to judicial officers, retired judicial officers and family pensioners shall be computed and paid on or before 29 February 2024. CSCDJs institutionalized in terms of directions issued earlier shall monitor compliance. Each Committee working under auspices of High Court shall submit its report to this Court on or before 7 April 2024 through Registrar General of High Court.
Result : Directions issued.

JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.

Contents

Objections by the Union Government and State Governments:
Allowances recommended by the SNJPC
1	House Building Advance (HBA)
2	Children Education Allowance (CEA)
3	City Compensatory Allowance (CCA)
4	Concurrent Charges Allowance
5	Conveyance/Transport Allowance (TP)
6	Dearness Allowance
7	Earned Leave Encashment
8	Electricity and Water Charges
9	Higher Qualification Allowance
10	Hill Area/Tough Location Allowance
11	Home Orderly/Domestic Help Allowance
12	House Rent Allowance and Residential Quarters
13	Leave Travel Concession(LTC)/Home Travel Concession(HTC)
14	Medical Allowance/Medical Facilities
Fixed Allowance
Medical Facilities and Reimbursement
15	Newspaper and Magazine Allowances
16	Risk Allowance
17	Robe Allowance
18	Special Pay for Administrative Work .
19	Sumptuary Allowance
20	Telephone Facility
21	Transfer Grant
	Institutionalization

1. By its orders dated 27 July 2022, 5 April 2023 and 19 May 2023, this Court has accepted the recommendations of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission¹[“SNJPC”], chaired by Justice P V Reddy, former Judge of this Court of India on the revision of pay and pension for judicial officers.

2. The abovementioned orders have delineated inter alia the history of the constitution of the SNJPC, and the principles underlying judicial pay, allowances and pensions. The contents of the earlier orders shall not be repeated here. This judgment pertains to the allowances which have been granted to judicial officers and retired judicial officers by the SNJPC. At this stage, it would be necessary to note that save and except for three allowances, where there was a modification, the allowances recommended by the First National Judicial Pay Commission known as the Shetty Commission were affirmed by this Court in All India Judges Association v Union of India, (2002) 4 SCC 247. Thereafter, all allowances which were recommended by the subsequent pay commission, namely the Judicial Pay Commission³[“JPC”] called the Justice Padmanabhan Committee were accepted by this Court in its decision reported as All India Judges Association v Union of India, (2010) 14 SCC 720.

3. Besides Mr K Parameshwar, Amicus Curiae, all the State governments and Union Territories have been given an opportunity to furnish their objections to the allowances, as proposed by the SNJPC. Objections have been filed on the record of this Court.

4. In the course of hearing, the following counsel have appeared on behalf of the States, or as the case may be, the Associations of Judges :

S. No.	Name of the counsel	Appearing for
1	Mr Gaurab Banerji, Sr. Adv.	AIJA
2	Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Sr. Adv	High Court at Calcutta
3	Mr Gopal Jha, Adv	All India Retired Judges Association
4	Ms Gautami Yadav, Adv	Maharashtra State Judges Association
5	Mr Sunny Choudhary	Madhya Pradesh
6	Mr Mukesh Kumar Verma	Andaman & Nicobar
7	Mr Joydip Roy, Adv.	All India Judges Association
8	Ms Madhumita Bhattacharjee	West Bengal
9	Mr Sanjay Kumar Tyagi	Uttar Pradesh
10	Mr Shuvodeep Roy	Assam and Tripura
11	Mr. Ravi Shanker Jha	Bihar
12	Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AAG	Tamil Nadu
13	Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, Adv	Tamil Nadu
14	Mr. Karan Sharma, Adv.	Punjab
15	Dr Manish Singhvi, Sr, Adv	Rajasthan
16	Mr V N Raghupathy, Adv	Karnataka
17	Deepanwita Priyanka, Adv	Gujarat
18	Mr. Sriharsha Pichara, Adv	Telangana
19	Mr Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar	Manipur
20	Ms K Enatoli Sema	Nagaland
21	Ravi Bakshi, Adv	Himachal Prades

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(SC) 29

Cases Referred (4)

Related Judgments

All India Judges Association VS Union of India - 2024 1 Supreme 605

All India Judges Association VS Union Of India - 2022 Supreme(SC) 1930

All India Judges Association VS Union of India - 2023 4 Supreme 135

Cherian Varghese VS State Of Kerala - 2023 Supreme(Ker) 26

State Of Kerala, Represented By The Principal Secretary, Department Of Home VS P. Muraleedharan - 2021 Supreme(Ker) 357

Laxmidhar Mishra VS State of Odisha - 2022 Supreme(Ori) 637

Secretary Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Government of Maharashtra v. S. C. Malte and Others - 2012 Supreme(Online)(SC) 113

Om Prakash Ram, S/o. Late Shri Khamdaram vs State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Law And Legislative Affairs Department - 2025 Supreme(Chh) 351

Syed Vilayat Hussain Quadari VS State of Maharashtra - 2021 Supreme(Bom) 1346

Ajit Kumar Singh, son of Late Bhim Singh VS State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna - 2024 Supreme(Pat) 1088