The Supreme Court on Tuesday said all High Court judges are one homogenous class of office holders and thus must be paid same service benefits including pension, without any discrimination.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra questioned how judges of different High Courts can be given different pensions.
"Article 216 does not distinguish on how High Court judges are appointed. Once appointed to the High court, all judges rank to par. Institution of the High Court consists of Chief Justice and all other judges appointed and no distinction can be made on payment of salaries or for other benefits," the Court said.
The Court was hearing a matter related to the pending salaries of Patna High Court judges and pension related issues faced by them.
In September, the top court had directed the State of Bihar to release the pending salary of Patna High Court judge Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra who had not received his salary for ten months due to the absence of a General Provident Fund (GPF) account.
The Court today said that any distinction in service benefits would undermine the principle of homogeneity among High Court judges.
"Thus there can be no difference in payment of salaries or other benefits for judges just like that of civil servants. The salaries are derived from the consolidated fund of States. Pensions are charged from the Consolidated Fund of India. The principle of non discrimination applies to how sitting and former judges are to be treated ...," it added.
Accordingly, the Court held the following:
1. High Court are constitutional institutions and all judges partake as upholders of constitutional offices.
2. Neither Article 221(1) nor Article 221(2) of the constitution contemplates that any discrimination can be made on the salaries being drawn by them.
3. Once appointed to High Court, all judges form part of one homogenous class of office holders .
4. There is an intrinsic relation between judicial independence and financial independence.
5. Any determination of service benefits to sitting judges and retiral benefits payable to them as pension must be without any discrimination.
6. Seeking to make any such distinction shall be unconstitutional.