(J. Chelameswar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.)
All India Judges Association _________________________ Petitioner
v.
Union of India & Ors. ___________________________ Respondent(s)
Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No(s). 643/2015, decided on March 27, 2018
With
SLP(C) No. 31461/2017 T.C.(C) No. 3/2018
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
WP(C) No. 643/2015
1. The Committee appointed by this Court by the Orders of this Court dated 9.5.2017, submitted a report dated 9.3.2018 on Interim Relief(Pay) to the Judicial Officers. The gist of the Report is summarised in paragraph 15 of the Report. It reads:—
Summary of recommendations:-
2. Interim relief to the extent of 30% of increase in basic pay with accrued increments shall be paid to all categories/ranks of Judicial Officers.
3. The said increased in Pay shall be treated as a separate component and no D.A. is payable thereon.
4. Arrears shall be worked out with effect from 01.01.2016 on the above basis. The details of calculations are set out in Annexure-I.
5. On the same basis, the interim relief shall be provided to the pensioners and family pensioners with effect from 01.01.2016 and the arrears to be paid accordingly.
6. Wherever the benefit of interim relief has already been granted, the Judicial Officers in those States/UTs can exercise their option to continue to be governed by such Orders.
7. The amounts payable by way of interim relief now proposed are liable to the adjusted against the future determination pursuant to the final report submitted by the Commission.
8. Heard Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, ASG, Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. Gourab Banerji, learned senior counsel for the petitioner Association and various learned counsel representing some of the States and the Union Territories. None of the respondents raised any objection with respect to the recommendations made by the above-mentioned Committee regarding the interim relief(pay). In the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to direct all the respondents to implement the recommendations of the Commission, the summary of which is already extracted above.
9. It is also brought to our notice that the Committee faced certain difficulties in the process of executing the task entrusted to them. The Chairman of the Committee addressed a letter to Mr. P.S. Narasimha, who is assisting the Committee. Mr. Narasimha placed a note before this Court pointing out the salient features of the above-mentioned letter. Having regard to the content of the letter mentioned above, we deem it appropriate to direct the Union of India as follows:—
(i) The Chairman and Members of the Commission should receive emoluments/pay and allowances from 01.06.2017 as they had commenced work in the first week of June, 2017.
(ii) The Secretary should receive emoluments w.e.f. 01.09.2017, as he had commenced work on 16.08.2017.
10. We also deem it appropriate to direct (i) the State of Telangana to provide the assistance of one of its Officers, not below the rank of a Joint Secretary in the Finance Department, to the Commission (ii) that the interim relief regarding the pay of the Judicial Officers as recommended by the Commission be implemented by all the concerned States and Union Territories w.e.f. 1st of May, 2018. The arrears payable pursuant to the abovementioned recommendations shall be paid on or before 30th June, 2018.
11. List this matter in the first week of August, 2018.
SLP(C) No. 31461/2017
T.C.(C) No. 3/2018
12. These two matters are inter-connected. The special leave petition arises out of an interlocutory order passed by the Bombay High Court on 11.8.2017 in PIL No. 188 of 2015, which is the subject matter of Transferred Case No. 3/2018.
13. It appears that the above-mentioned writ petition came to be filed as a Public Interest Litigation projecting various perceived inadequacies in the service conditions of the Officers of the Subordinate Judiciary of the State of Maharashtra and seeking appropriate reliefs. One of the grievances in the Public Interest Litigation is regarding the pay and other allowances including the pension of the Subordinate Judicial Officers in the State of Maharashtra.
14. Admittedly, till 1st January, 2016, payment of salaries and pension and other allowances were made in accordance with the recommendations made earlier by the two Committees appointed by this Court otherwise known as Shetty Commission and Padmanabhan Commission. It appears, subsequent to 1.1.2016, the State of Maharashtra took a different stand, the details of which we do not want to go at this stage, in view of the statement made by Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned ASG representing State of Maharashtra. It is expressly stated that the report regarding the interim relief(pay) and the orders passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 643/2015 would be implemented by the State of Maharashtra and would be bound by the final order of this Court in All India Judges Association v. Union of India (W.P.(C) No. 643/2015) proceedings, to be passed after a final report of the Commission is received.
15. By an Order dated 1.12.2017, this Court called upon the High Court of Bombay to transfer the writ petition no. 188 of 2015 to this Court. It is stated by Mr. B.H. Marlapalle, learned senior counsel and Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG appearing for the State of Maharashtra that the grievances projected in the writ petition are not only confined to the payment of salaries, allowances and pension and various other issues like inadequacy of infrastructural facilities in the State of Maharashtra etc. and those questions could more conveniently be dealt with by the High Court.
16. In the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to direct the Registry to return the Writ Petition No. 188 of 2015 to the Bombay High Court for disposal in accordance with law. The High Court would obviously not deal with the questions which are being considered by this Court for the resolution, of which Justice Venkatarama Reddi Commission had been appointed.
17. The writ petition no. 188 of 2015 is remitted back to the Bombay High Court. The transferred case is accordingly disposed of.
18. The special leave petition is also disposed of accordingly.
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 643/2015
All India Judges Association ______________________ Petitioner
v.
Union of India & Ors _________________________ Respondent(s)
WITH SLP(C) No. 31461/2017
T.C. (C) No. 3/2018
Date : 27-03-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
(Before J. Chelameswar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.)
Mr. P.S. Narsimha, ASG
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gourab Banerji, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi, AOR
Mr. Vyom Raghuvanshi, Adv.
Ms. Sangya Negi, Adv.
Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv.
SLP(C) 31461/2017 Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG
Mr. Nishant Ramaikantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR
Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, AOR
Mr. Anupam Kirti, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. ANS Nadkarni, ASG
Ms. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv.
Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Adv.
Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Rani Singh, Adv.
Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv.
Mr. Pushkar Taimni, Adv.
Ms. Kashvi Dutta, Adv.
Mr. Umesh Babu Chaurasia, Adv.
Mr. M.K. Maroria, AOR
Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR
Mr. B.V. Balramdas, AOR
Ms. Anil Katiyar, AOR
Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR
Mr. B.H. Marlapalle, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, AOR
A&N Administration Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Adv.
Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Adv.
Ms. G. Indira, AOR
State of A.P. Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR
Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv.
State of Arunachal Pradesh Mr. Anil Srivastav, AOR
Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
High Court of Chatisgarh Mr. A.P. Mayee, AOR
Mr. Avnish M. Oza, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
Mr. Apoorv Kurup, AOR
Mr. Avanish Rathi, Adv.
HC of Calcutta Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR
Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Saurav Gupta, Adv.
HC of Delhi Mr. A.D.N. Rao, AOR
Mr. A. Venkatesh, Adv.
Mr. Sudipto Sircar, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Mishra, Adv.
Ms. Tulika Chikker, Adv.
State of Gujarat Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv.
Ms. Mamta Singh, Adv.
Ms. Vishakha, Adv.
Ms. Shodika Sharma, Adv.
HC of Bombay Mr. A.P. Mayee, AOR
Mr. Avnish M. Oza, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
State of Goa Mr. ANS Nadkarni, ASG
Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.
Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.
Mr. Santosh S. Rebello, Adv.
Ms. Niharika, Adv.
Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv.
For M/s. K.J. John & Co., AOR
Mr. P.I. Jose, AOR
Ms. P.S. Chandralekha, Adv.
Mr. Shashank Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, AOR
State of Jharkhand Mr. V.V.V.M.B.N.S. Pattabhi Ram, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Arun, AOR
Mr. Dileep Kumar Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Ratan Kr. Choudhuri, AOR
HC of Jharkhand Mr. Krishnanand Pandeya, AOR
State of Karnataka Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR
Mr. Parikshit P. Angadi, Adv.
Mr. Prakash Jadhav, Adv.
State of MP Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR
Mr. Manish Yadav, Adv.
HC of Madras Mr. A. Radhakrishnan, AOR
Dr. Ritu Bhardwaj, Adv.
State of Manipur Mr. Leishangthem Roshmani Kh, AOR
Ms. Maibam Babina, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kr. Singh, AOR
HC of Gauhati Ms. Sneha Kalita, AOR
HC of Manipur Mr. Punya Garg, Adv.
HC of Meghalaya Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, AOR
Mr. Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Akhilendra Singh, Adv.
State of Maharashtra Mr. Kunal A. Cheema, Adv.
Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, AOR
State of Meghalaya Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. Daniel Stone Lyngdoh, Adv.
State of Mizoram Mr. K.N. Madhusoodhanan, Adv.
Ms. Nitya Madhusoodhanan, Adv.
Mr. T.G.N. Nair, AOR
State of Nagaland Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR
Mr. Edward Belho, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. K. Luikang Michael, Adv.
Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Adv.
State of Odisha Mr. Krishnayan Sen, AOR
Ms. Asiya Khan, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Jain, Adv.
Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra, AOR
Govt. of Puducherry Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. V.G. Pragasam, AOR
Mr. S. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv.
Mr. S. Manuraj, Adv.
Mr. Yashraj Singh Bundela, Adv.
Mr. Praveen Vignesh, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR
State of Sikkim Ms. Aruna Mathur, Adv.
Sikkim HC Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv.
Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv.
Ms. Simran Jeet, Adv.
M/s. Arputham Aruna & Co., AOR
HC of Tripura Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, AOR
State of Uttarakhand Mr. Tanmaya Agarwal, Adv.
Ms. Rachna Srivastava, AOR
High Court of Uttarakhand Mr. Mukesh K. Giri, AOR
State of WB Mr. Soumitra G. Chaudhri, Adv.
Mr. Chanchal K. Ganguli, AOR
Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, AOR
Mr. Anupam Kirti, Adv.
HC of Allahabad Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhuri, AOR
State of HP Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR
Mr. Suryanarayana Singh, Adv.
Ms. Kaveri Vats, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Marwah, Adv.
Mr. Mool Singh, Adv.
Rajasthan HC Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR
Mr. Bharat Sangal, AOR
Ms. Anindita D, Adv.
Ms. Vidushi Garg, Adv.
Ms. Babita Kushwaha, Adv.
Mr. Nikhil Goel, AOR
Ms. Naveen Goel, Adv.
Mr. Ashutosh Ghade, Adv.
Mr. G. Prakash, AOR
Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR
Mr. Devendra Singh, AOR
Mr. Abhisth Kumar, AOR
Mr. Parijat Sinha, AOR
Mr. T.R.B. Sivakumar, AOR
Mr. Suhaan Mukerji, Adv.
Mr. Harsh Hiroo Gushahani, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR
Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR
Ms. Pallavi Saharma, AOR
M/s. PLR Chambers and Co.
Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, AOR
Mr. N. Sai Vinod, Adv.
Mr. Dhananjay Baijal, Adv.
Ms. Smriti Shah, Adv.
Mr. Divyanshu Rai, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
WP(C) No. 643/2015
19. List the matter in the first week of August, 2018.
SLP(C) No. 31461/2017
T.C.(C) No. 3/2018
20. The transferred case is disposed of.
21. The special leave petition is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
———
