New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday (January 7) remarked that the States have money to give freebies to the people who do not do any work but they talk of constraints when it comes to paying salary and pension to the judges of the district judiciary.
A bench comprising Justice BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih remarked this while hearing a 2015 petition filed by the All India Judges Association.
What did the Attorney General submit?
The response of the bench came on a submission made by Attorney General R Venkataramani, who said that the government has to take into consideration financial constraints when deciding the pay and retirement benefits of judicial officers.
What did the bench say?
The bench mentioned Maharashtra government’s Ladli Behna scheme and recent poll promises made by various political parties in Delhi’s upcoming assembly polls.
“The states have all the money for the people who don’t do any work. When we talk abut financial constraints we also have to look at this. Come elections you declare ladli behana 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 ₹2500 if they come to power,” Justice Gawai orally remarked, Bar and Bench reported.
Country needs to pay judges better for a more diversified judiciary: Amicus curiae
Senior Advocate Parameshwar K, who has been appointed the amicus curiae into the matter, submitted that the country needs to pay judges better for a more diversified judiciary.
“If we have to get new talent, if we have to get a more diversified judiciary in our country, first generation lawyers have to accept judgeship, those from rural backgrounds have to accept judgeship, financial independence of the judges is a necessity,” Parameshwar submitted.
The top court had earlier also raised its concerns on the meagre pension rates payable to district judges in the country.
The matter would be further heard by the court tomorrow.
