Back
B. R. GAVAI, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, K. VINOD CHANDRAN
In Re: Refixation of Pension Considering Service Period In District Judiciary And High Court – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent
Key Points: - The Union of India must pay full pensions to retired High Court Chief Justices and other High Court Judges, with One Rank One Pension applied across source of entry (!) (!) (!) (!) . - Full pension ceiling and amounts: Chief Justice Rs.15,00,000 per annum; other Judges Rs.13,50,000 per annum (!) (!) (!) . - Added years and parity: Section 14A and related judgments mandate adding 10 years’ service for pension for Judges elevated from Bar; equivalent parity urged for District Judiciary entrants (P. Ramakrishnam Raju; M.L. Jain line) (!) (!) (!) - (!) . - Family pension and gratuity: Family pension at 50% then 30%; gratuity enhanced by 10 years service; applicability to widows of Additional Judges too (!) - (!) (!) - (!) . - Provident Fund and other allowances: All HCJ Act allowances including Leave Encashment, Commutation, Provident Fund to be paid; clarifications post-NPS; refunds of NPS contributions to affected retirees (!) - (!) .
JUDGMENT
B.R. GAVAI, CJI.
| INDEX | |
| I. | INTRODUCTION AND A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE ISSUES |
| II. | LEGAL PROVISIONS |
| a. | Article 221 of the Constitution of India |
| b. | High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 |
| i. | Section 2 |
| ii. | Section 13A |
| iii. | Section 14 |
| iv. | Section 15 |
| v. | Section 17A |
| vi. | First Schedule – Part I and Part III |
| III. | JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS |
| a. | M.L. Jain and Another v. Union of India [M L Jain (I)] |
| b. | M.L. Jain v. Union of India [M L Jain (II) |
| c. | Kuldip Singh v. Union of India |
| d. | P. Ramakrishnam Raju v. Union of India and Others |
| e. | Union of India, Ministry of Law & Justice v. Justice (Retd) Raj Rahul Garg (Raj Rani Jain) and Others |
| f. | Jagdish Chandra Gupta v. Union of India and Others |
| g. | Justice Shailendra Singh and Others v. Union of India and Others |
| IV. | DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS |
| a. | Non-consideration of services rendered as District Judges for payment of Full Pension |
| b. | Denial of Full Pension owing to break-in-service |
| c. | Den |
(1) Pensionary Benefits of Judges in Higher Judiciary – Union of India shall pay full pension of Rs.15,00,000/- per annum to a retired Chief Justice of High Court – Union of India shall pay full pen....
Pensionary benefits of High Court Judges – Once appointed to High Court, every Judge ranks at par – Once appointed, no distinction can be made between Judges for the purpose of payment of salary and ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of a former Judge of the High Court to blend her service periods and have her pensionary payments computed based on her last drawn ....
Family pension is included in the definition of pension under the Judges Act, entitling the spouse of a retired Chairperson to claim it.
(1) A unified judiciary necessarily entails that service conditions of Judges of one State are equivalent to similar posts of judges of other States – Judiciary must possess inherent power to compel ....
Judges' pensions are a protected right under Article 125(7) of the Federal Constitution, and any alteration to the pension adjustment formula that disadvantages retired judges is unconstitutional.
Retired Judges of High Courts are entitled to medical facilities on par with sitting Judges, affirming the need for legislative uniformity to uphold judicial independence.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
