Decoding All India Judges Association v. UOI judgement: A Pivotal Judgment on Judicial Well-being

By Saurav Yadav

Published on: February 13, 2024 at 17:18 IST

The All India Judges Association, a unified voice for judges across India, recently made headlines in a landmark case Titled All India Judges Association V.Union of India.

The All-India Judges Association was formed to address various issues concerning the judiciary, including the welfare of judges, judicial reforms, and the independence of the judiciary. It serves as a platform for judges from different parts of the country to come together, discuss common concerns, and advocate for their rights and interests.

The Second National Judicial Pay Commission was set up by the Supreme Court in 2017 to review the pay scale and other conditions of Judicial Officers across the district judiciary nationwide.

This article provides an in-depth analysis of the case, shedding light on the association’s role, the Second National Judicial Pay Commission’s recommendations, and the consequential judgment that addresses crucial aspects of judicial service.

The judgment titled “All India Judges Association v. UoI and Ors.” was delivered on January 04,2024 This judgment discusses the allowances given to judicial officers and retired judicial officers by the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC).

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, delivered judgment emphasizing the significance of dignified working conditions for judicial officers, in their judgment on the All India Judges Association Case it was also emphasized that the quality of working conditions directly influences judicial independence, a cornerstone of a robust judiciary system.

The judgment underscored the demanding nature of the duties performed by judicial officers. That is beyond the confines of regular court hours, the officers often engage in various tasks such as administrative functions, case preparation, and drafting judgments. These responsibilities frequently extend into weekends and beyond, reflecting the considerable commitment required to fulfill their roles effectively.

In essence, the judgment emphasizes the interdependence between dignified working conditions, judicial independence, and the attractiveness of the judiciary as a viable career path. By recognizing and addressing the needs of judicial officers, the judiciary can strengthen its institutional integrity and better serve the interests of justice.

The issue in concern was regarding the Implementation of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC) recommendations for revised pay structure and allowances for judicial officers.

The Supreme Court directed the Union and States to implement the SNJPC recommendations with some modifications. It rejected objections about financial c

The Court noted that the previous pay commission recommendations (7th Central Pay Commission) had not been applied to judicial officers, leading to disparity. It recognized the critical role of the judiciary and the need for independent and well-resourced judges. It rejected arguments about financial burden, stating that financial constraints cannot be used to justify inadequate compensation for essential services.

All States and Union Territories shall now act in terms of the above directions expeditiously. Disbursements on account of arrears of salary, pension and allowances due and payable to judicial officers, retired judicial officers and family pensioners shall be computed and paid on or before 29 February 2024., ordered Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra.

To ensure smooth implementation, the Court mandated the formation of “Committee for Service Conditions of the District Judiciary” in each High Court. These committees would oversee the process and address any arising issues.

The judgment required the Union and States to pay arrears of salary, pension, and allowances by February 29, 2024. This provided immediate financial relief to judges and their families.

Here are some important points from the recommendations and allowances discussed in the judgment.

  1. The House Building Advance (HBA): The House Building Advance (HBA) is a benefit provided to judicial officers to help them purchase a house. The Second National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC) recommended that judicial officers should be allowed to use this advance to buy a house from private individuals, with certain conditions set by the state government in consultation with the High Courts. Before this recommendation, the HBA could only be used to buy houses from government agencies or organizations, not from private individuals.
  2. Children Education Allowance (CEA): The SNJPC recommended changes to the Children Education Allowance (CEA) starting from the academic year 2019-2020. According to the recommendations, judicial officers would receive Rs 2,250 per month as CEA for each child up to Class 12. Additionally, a hostel subsidy of Rs 6,750 per month would be provided for up to two children. For children with special needs, the reimbursement rate would be twice the standard rate.
  3. Conveyance/Transport Allowance (TP): The SNJPC made several recommendations regarding the Conveyance/Transport Allowance:
    • Discontinuation of pool car service: The recommendation suggests discontinuing the use of pool car services for various judicial officers.
    • Eligibility for official vehicles: Three additional judicial functionaries would be eligible for official vehicles: Director of the Judicial Academy/Judicial Training Institute, Principal Judge of the Family Courts, and Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority. The High Courts have the authority to adjust this list based on the financial capacity of the state.
  4. Permission for displaying designation: Judicial officers would be allowed to display a sticker on the lower left side of the windscreen with the word ‘Judge’ printed in moderately sized letters, if they choose to do so.
  5. Higher Qualification Allowance: The SNJPC recognized that obtaining higher qualifications in law involves specialized study and can enhance the quality of work done by judicial officers. The recommendations regarding this allowance include:
    • Granting of advance increments: Judicial officers would receive three advance increments for obtaining a post-graduate degree in law and an additional increment if they acquire a Doctorate in Law.
    • Denial of benefit at ACP stage: Initially, the SNJPC recommended denying the benefit of advance increments at the ACP (Assured Career Progression) stage. However, the Court disagreed with this recommendation and stated that advance increments for higher qualifications should also be available to officers who earned their degrees through distance learning programs.
  6. Hill Area/Tough Location Allowance: The SNJPC made the following recommendations:
    • Payment of Allowance: Judicial Officers posted in hill areas or tough locations would receive a Hill Area/Tough Location Allowance of Rs. 5000 per month.
    • Extension of Benefits: Any more advantageous provisions already applicable to officials of the State/UT would also be extended to Judicial Officers.
  7. Home Orderly/Domestic Help Allowance: Under this category, the SNJPC made the following recommendations:
    • District Judges: They should receive an allowance equivalent to the minimum wages for one unskilled worker in the respective State/UT, with a minimum of Rs. 10,000 per month.
    • Civil Judges: They should receive an allowance equal to 60% of the minimum wages for one unskilled worker in the respective State/UT, with a minimum of Rs. 7,500 per month.
  8. House Rent Allowance and Residential Quarters: The SNJPC recommended that state governments should promptly construct residential quarters for judicial officers, with the court overseeing the progress. Judicial officers must be provided accommodation or requisitioned private accommodation within one month of taking charge. If not provided within this time frame, officers can secure private accommodation and receive rent as per the specified terms.
  9. Medical Allowance: The fixed medical allowance for serving judicial officers was increased to Rs 3,000 per month, effective from January 1, 2016. Pensioners and family pensioners also saw an increase to Rs 4,000 per month.
  10. Risk Allowance: Judicial officers working in Jammu & Kashmir and insurgency-affected North East States are eligible for risk allowance at the same rate as civilian government officials in those areas.
  11. Special Pay for Administrative Work: Judicial officers overseeing certain courts/tribunals with administrative responsibilities may receive special pay for the extra time spent on administrative tasks outside regular court hours. This applies particularly to Principal District and Sessions Judges or similar District Judges with similar responsibilities.
  12. Transfer Grant: The SNJPC recommended that on transfer, judicial officers receive a composite transfer grant equivalent to one month’s basic pay. However, if the transfer is within 20 kilometers or within the same city involving an actual change of residence, the grant is reduced to 1/3rd of the basic pay.
  13. Newspaper and Magazine Allowance: District Judges are eligible for reimbursement of Rs. 1000 for two newspapers and two magazines, while Civil Judges receive Rs. 700 for two newspapers and one magazine. Reimbursement is on a half-yearly basis, based on self-certification, starting from January to June and July to December, effective from January 1, 2020.
  14. Robe Allowance: Judicial officers receive a robe allowance of Rs. 12,000 once every three years, effective from January 1, 2016. However, the demand for the robe allowance cannot be made until the next commission.
  15. Telephone and Mobile Facility: Recommendations regarding telephone and mobile facility were accepted.

Overall, the All India Judges Association v. Union of India judgment marks a crucial step towards ensuring a well-compensated and independent judiciary in India. This serves as a positive development for the Indian legal system and its ability to deliver justice effectively.

The judgment significantly improves the service conditions of judicial officers in India by increasing their salaries and allowances. This is expected to attract and retain talented individuals in the judiciary, thereby strengthening the overall justice system.

The Judgement significantly aims in promoting judicial independence, attracting top-tier talent to the judiciary, and bolstering public confidence in the fairness and impartiality of the Indian judicial system. These outcomes collectively contribute to the overall strength and credibility of the judiciary as a cornerstone of the Indian legal system.

Edited By: Bharti Verma, Associate Editor at law Insider

Related Post