Centre to rectify pension discrepancy among High Court judges

More than a year has passed since the Supreme Court held that lower pension for High Court judges drawn from the Bar in contradistinction to judges drawn from the lower judiciary is violative of right to equality under Article 14. The Central government is finally considering amending the relevant statutory provisions to rectify this anomaly..The proposal to amend the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, comes more than a year after the Supreme Court ruled that such a discrepancy must be removed. The Law Ministry plans to bring the bill in the Monsoon session of Parliament beginning on July 21, reports Firstpost..The petition in Supreme Court was filed by former High Court judges and Association of the Retired Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts elevated from the Bar..The petitioners had prayed that the number of years practiced as an advocate should be taken into account and be added to the service as a Judge of the High Court for the purpose of determining the maximum pension permissible under Part-I of the First Schedule to the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954..They had further submitted that Judges elevated from the State Judicial Service got higher pension even if they had worked as a Judge of the High Court for two or three years because their entire service was added to their service as a Judge of the High Court for computing pension. This, the Petitioners had contended, was a breach of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and had, therefore, sought that “one rank, one pension” must be the norm in respect of a constitutional office..A three judge Bench comprising Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justices Ranjan Gogoi and NV Ramana had accepted these arguments and held that for the purpose of determining pensionary benefits, ten years’ practice as an advocate should be added as a qualifying service for Judges elevated from the Bar..Interestingly, the Supreme Court is now hearing another significant case concerning judges – whether judges from lower judiciary can be appointed as District judges by direct recruitment and not by way of ‘promotions through rank’.