Safiya Malik

The Supreme Court of India, on January 7, 2025, expressed concerns regarding the financial priorities of state governments, highlighting their readiness to fund election-driven freebies while citing financial constraints in addressing the pay and pensions of judicial officers. The remarks were made during the hearing of a plea filed by the All India Judges Association, which has sought better pay and pensions for district judges and other judicial officers.

A Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih questioned the government’s approach, particularly in light of pre-election announcements such as the Maharashtra government’s Ladli Behna Yojna and similar promises by political parties in Delhi. Justice Gavai remarked, “The States have all the money for the people who don’t do any work. When we talk about financial constraints, we also have to look at this. Come elections, you declare Ladli Behna and other new schemes where you pay fixed amounts. In Delhi, we have announcements now from some party or the other saying they will pay ₹2,500 if they come to power.”

The Attorney General for India (AG), R. Venkataramani, representing the government, argued that fiscal constraints must be factored into decisions on judicial pay scales and pensions. He described the culture of election-oriented freebies as an “aberration” and noted  the financial burden it imposes on the state exchequer. He further highlighted the growing pension liabilities under the New Pension Scheme, stating that these factors must be pragmatically considered while addressing demands for judicial officers' financial independence.

The plea, filed in 2015, raised concerns over the inadequate pay and pensions for district judges, even for those elevated to High Courts. Over the years, the Supreme Court has consistently flagged the issue, emphasizing that financial independence is integral to maintaining an efficient and impartial judiciary. Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Parameshwar K, assisting the Court, argued that the judiciary must retain a say in its service conditions despite the powers granted to the executive and legislature under Article 309 of the Constitution. He invoked the doctrine of inherent powers, asserting that judicial independence and efficiency necessitate financial autonomy.

Senior Advocate Parameshwar further submitted that better pay and pensions could foster diversity within the judiciary. “If we want a more diversified judiciary, we need to pay our judges better, take care of our judges better. Otherwise, the same class of persons will become judges in this country. Financial independence is necessary for first-generation lawyers and those from rural backgrounds to consider joining the judiciary,” he argued.

The Court was unpersuaded by the Attorney General’s request to defer the hearing on the ground that the Centre might issue a notification addressing the issues raised in the plea. The Bench noted the prolonged pendency of the matter and stated, “If any notification is issued after the hearings are over, the AG can inform the Court.”

The amicus curiae further stressed that the low financial incentives for judicial officers undermine the judiciary’s ability to attract talent, ultimately affecting the quality of justice delivery. He argued that a robust pay structure for judges would ensure their financial independence and protect the judiciary from undue external influences.

The Court, however, observed that fiscal constraints alone cannot justify neglecting the financial well-being of judicial officers, as it directly impacts the judiciary's efficiency and independence. Justice Gavai noted that the judiciary is a vital pillar of democracy, and its financial independence cannot be compromised for political considerations or electoral promises.

The hearing is scheduled to continue on January 8, 2025, listed as part-heard, to address the issues concerning the financial independence of judicial officers.

Case Title: All India Judges Association v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Number: Pending before Supreme Court
Bench Composition: Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih

[View/Download order]