ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The District Judiciary (No longer should this Court refer to the District Judiciary as 'subordinate judiciary'. Not only is this a misnomer because the District Judge is not per se subordinate to any other person in the exercise of her jurisdiction but also is disrespectful to the constitutional position of a District Judge. Our Constitution recognizes and protects a District Judge as a vital cog in the judicial system. Respect ought to be accorded to this institution and its contribution to the country. See also, Upendra Baxi, The judiciary as a resource for Indian democracy, India Seminar, November 2010 - available at https://www.india-seminar.com/2010/615/615_upendra_baxi.htm) is the backbone of the judicial system. Vital to the judicial system is the independence of the judicial officers serving in the District Judiciary. To secure their impartiality, it is important to ensure their financial security and economic independence. To this end, at the instance of the All India Judges Association, this Court, in 1993 found the need to state that there must be a Judicial Pay Commission, separate and independent from the Executive in order to ensure that the system of checks and balances are in place, and the Judiciary has a say in their pay and service conditions (All India Judges' Association (II) v. Union of India), (1993) 4 SCC 288.

(2.) Pursuant to the judgment of this Court, the First National Judicial Pay Commission ("FNJPC") was constituted by the Government of India by Resolution dtd. 21/3/1996. The FNJPC, headed by Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty, submitted a comprehensive report on 11/11/1999. This comprehensive report contained recommendations on pay, pension and allowances as well as other service conditions pertaining to the district judiciary. After prolonged proceedings, on 21/3/2002, this Court approved the recommendations of the FNJPC pertaining to emoluments with certain modifications relating to allowances (All India Judges' Association (III) v. Union of India), (2002) 4 SCC 247. Notably, the recommendations were accepted with effect from 1/1/1996. This was because the employees of the Central Government were given the benefits of the 5th Central Pay Commission from that date.

(3.) Within the next few years, the Central Government appointed the 6th Central Pay Commission, and the Commission made its recommendations which were accepted from 1/1/2006. To ensure that the District Judiciary does not lag behind, this Court once again stepped in at the instance of the very same All India Judges Association. This Court appointed a One-Person Commission headed by Justice E Padmanabhan (Retd Judge of the High Court of Madras) by Order dtd. 28/4/2009. The One-Person Commission once again submitted a report, which was accepted by this Court by Order dtd. 20/4/2010 (All India Judges Association (3) v. Union of India) (2010) 15 SCC 170. The revised pay scales, which are currently in force, as recommended by this Commission, were made effective from 1/1/2006.