10 Jan 2024 4:38 AM GMT
While issuing directions for the implementation of the recommendations of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission, the Supreme Court emphasised the obligation of the State to provide dignified working conditions for judicial officers.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, in the judgment passed in the All India Judges Association Case, highlighted that dignified working conditions for judicial officers have a correlation with judicial independence.
The judgment stressed the arduous working nature of judicial officers, pointing out that their duties extend beyond court hours and on weekends, to perform administrative functions, preparation before hearing and writing of judgments.
If the service of the 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, the Court reminded.
The observations are quoted below (emphasis supplied) :
"Judicial service is an integral and significant component of the functions of the State and contributes to the constitutional obligation to sustain the rule of law. Judicial service is distinct in its characteristics and in terms of the responsibilities which are cast upon the officers of the District Judiciary to render objective dispensation of justice to citizens. The State is duty bound to ensure that the conditions of service, both during the tenure of office and after retirement, are commensurate with the need to maintain dignified working conditions for serving judicial officers and in the post-retirement emoluments made available to former members of the judicial service. Members of the district judiciary are the first point of engagement for citizens who are confronted with the need for dispute resolution. The conditions in which judicial officers across the country are required to work are arduous. The work of a judicial officer is not confined merely to the working hours rendered in the course of judicial duties in the court. Every judicial officer is required to work both before and after the court working hours. The judicial work of each day requires preparation before cases are called out. A judicial officer continues to work on cases which may have been dealt with in court, in terms of preparing the judgment and attending to other administrative aspects of the judicial record. That apart, members of the district judiciary have wide ranging administrative functions which take place beyond working hours, especially on week-ends including the discharge of numerous duties in relation to prison establishments, juvenile justice institutions, legal service camps and in general, work associated with the Legal Services Act 1987.
The work of a Judge cannot be assessed solely in terms of their duties during court working hours. The State is under an affirmative obligation to ensure dignified conditions of work for its judicial officers and it cannot raise the defense of an increase in financial burden or expenditure. Judicial officers spend the largest part of their working life in service of the institution. The nature of the office often renders the incumbent incapacitated in availing of opportunities for legal work which may otherwise be available to a member of the Bar. That furnishes an additional reason why post-retirement, it is necessary for the State to ensure that judicial officers are able to live in conditions of human dignity. It needs to be emphasized that providing for judges, both during their tenure and upon retirement, is correlated with the independence of the judiciary. Judicial independence, which is necessary to preserve the faith and confidence of common citizens in the rule of law, can be ensured and enhanced only so long as judges are able to lead their life with a sense of financial dignity. The conditions of service while a judge is in service must ensure a dignified existence. The post-retirement conditions of service have a crucial bearing on the dignity and independence of the office of a judge and how it is perceived by the society. If the service of the 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".
The judgment set a deadline of February 29, 2024 for the States to pay the arrears to judicial officers in terms of the recommendations of the SNJPC. The Court also directed the High Courts to constitute a committee named 'Committee for Service Conditions of the District Judiciary' to oversee the implementation.
The composition of the committee shall be:
(i) Two Judges of the High Court to be nominated by the Chief Justice of which one should be a Judge who has previously served as a member of the district judiciary;
(ii) The Law Secretary/Legal Remembrancer;
(iii) The Registrar General of the High Court who shall serve as an ex officio Secretary of the Committee; and
(iv) A retired judicial officer in the cadre of District Judge to be nominated by the Chief Justice who shall act as a nodal officer for the day to day redressal of grievances.
Other reports on the judgment can be read here.
Case Title: All India Judges Association v. UoI And Ors. WP(C) No. 643/2015
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 25
Click here to read the judgment