SECTION OFFICER BROTHERHOOD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This is a matter of pay fixation of the Section Officers holding the equivalent post of Administrative Officer (Judicial) under the serial No. 8 of the statement showing the pay scales of officers/officials of Delhi High Court being dated 14.12.2004. Supreme Court was pleased to pass an order on 27.9.2004 as follows :

(2.) HOWEVER, on the basis of such order a Committee of four Judges was formed by the Chief Justice. Such Committee made a report. An important observation of the report is as follows :

(3.) THEREAFTER, nothing happened with regard to the recommendation made by the Committee and order passed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice. The recommendation is dated 28.10.2004, when the order of the Chief Justice is dated 3.8.2005. The petitioners contended that several representations have been made including the last representation dated 21.12.2006, but all are in vain. Therefore, we are of the view that the State Government cannot sit tight over the matter indefinitely without consideration particularly when the Chief Justice has passed an order on the basis of the recommendation of the Judges Committee and forwarded to the State for taking necessary steps. State cannot take the matter so lightly in such circumstances at all. The staff of the High Court is under the protective umbrella of the Chief Justice. Officers and servants of the Court in the strict sense, may be Government servants, but their position is entirely different and free from the control of the Government. Their service conditions are regulated by the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice is the highest functionary on the judicial side of the State. He is the head and heart of the judicial system at the State level. Even thereafter if the State takes the matter so lightly it will tantamount to potential threat to the independency of the judiciary which cannot be the welcoming situation.