'Retired District Judges Getting Pension Of Only Rs 19-20K, How Do They Survive? : Supreme Court Seeks AG's Assistance

The Supreme Court today (February 26) while hearing the matter of the pension scheme for judicial officers, flagged concerns on the plight of the retired district judicial officers who were getting inadequate financial support through the present pension policies. The Court urged the Union to find a 'Just Solution' for the officers who have substantially contributed to the cause of Justice 

The CJI DY Chandrachud brought attention to the dire financial conditions faced by retired district judges, emphasizing that they were receiving pensions as low as Rs 19,000-20,000 after years of dedicated service. He pointed out the challenges of transitioning to other avenues at an age when they are physically unable to engage in active legal practice

CJI expressed "The retired District judges are clocking a pension of Rs 19000-20000 ...after a long service, how do they survive? This is the kind of office where you are completely disabled, you cannot suddenly jump into practice and go to the High Court at the age of 61-62 years and start practising" 

He requested the Attorney General (AG) Mr R Venkataramani who was representing the Union in the matter to provide assistance in coming up with a "just Solution" for the retired judicial officers facing the setbacks of such a disproportionate pension policy. 

" We want a just solution to this. The district judges are really suffering you know." 

The AG taking serious note of the same, replied that he would certainly look into the issue.  The CJI also pointed out that judges of some High Courts have approached the Supreme Court over the non-release of salary since new GPF accounts were not allotted to them after their elevation from the district judiciary.

The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, was hearing the All India Judges Association matter, in which the Court has earlier issued directions relating to the pay and service conditions of the judges, accepting the recommendations of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission's recommendations. Last month, the Court directed the states to clear the SNJPC arrears by February 29 and asked the High Courts to constitute committees to oversee the implementation.

In the brief hearing today, Advocate K Parameshwar, the amicus curiae in the matter, took the bench through the affidavits filed by some of the states.

"I have compiled all affidavits from the states ....state argues that there will be a heavy financial burden that is the substantial opposition...Union of India says this is part of a larger fiscal move , we must reduce the pension burden in contrast to the ratio of the GDP...that's their argument. States say that we are willing to do this subject to Union contributing to the pension finances, then mylords may have to relook the judgement," he submitted.

"Under the scheme, the judicial officer who has given a substantial 20-30 years to the country if is unable to be promoted as a HC judge draws way less pension than his colleague who would make it to the HC," Parameshwar pointed out.

Parameshwar said that an adequate pension is also necessary to ensure the judicial independence of an officer. The bench will continue the hearing next Monday.

Case Details : ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION vs. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 001022 / 1989