Crime Today News
By Dr Swati Jindal Garg
Delivering a landmark judgment in In Re: Refixation of Pension Considering Service Period in District Judiciary and High Court (2025), a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and comprising Justices AG Masih and K Vinod Chandran, ruled that all retired High Court judges must receive full pension benefits regardless of their designation or background.
The judgment mandates that pension disparities—based on whether a judge entered the High Court from the Bar or via the district judiciary—must be eliminated. The ruling ensures that the principles of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution extend fully to retired judges.
A CONSTITUTIONAL IMPERATIVE
The Court underscored that once a person enters the constitutional office of a High Court judge, there can be no differentiation in service conditions or retiral benefits based on their route of appointment or gaps in service. “When all High Court judges are treated equally in salary and perquisites during service, any discrimination in pension after retirement is patently unconstitutional,” the bench observed.
END OF “BREAK-IN-SERVICE” PENALTY
A significant aspect of the ruling was the treatment of judges who had a gap between retiring as district judges and taking office in the High Court. Previously, such gaps were termed as “breaks in service”, resulting in a reduced pension. The Court rejected this logic, reiterating the precedent in Justice (Retd.) Raj Rahul Garg that such breaks cannot be used to penalize judges.
The Court also acknowledged the hardships faced by judges under the New Pension Scheme (NPS), affirming that they too are entitled to full pension, regardless of when they entered the judiciary.
NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ADDITIONAL JUDGES
In a significant clarification, the judgment held that the term “judge” under Section 2(g) of the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, includes chief justices, acting chief justices, additional judges, and acting judges. Therefore, additional judges are entitled to the same pension benefits as their permanent counterparts.
STATUTORY AND FINANCIAL RECOGNITION
The Court directed the Union government to pay:
- Rs 15 lakh per annum in full pension to all retired chief justices of High Courts.
- Rs 13.5 lakh per annum to other retired High Court judges.
Additionally, in cases of judges who died in service—whether permanent or additional—the Court ordered that 10 years of service be notionally added to compute gratuity and family pension. This move will significantly benefit the widows and dependents of judges who passed away while serving.
UNIFORMITY EXTENDED ACROSS JUDICIAL BODIES
The ruling applies not just to High Court judges, but also to judicial officers in all subordinate courts, and extends to institutions like the National Green Tribunal. This broad application cements the principle of equality for constitutional office holders across the judiciary.
UPHOLDING JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
The Court held that financial insecurity in retirement undermines judicial independence and dignity. By harmonizing pension norms, the judgment affirms that the independence of the judiciary does not end with retirement. “Permitting different states to have varying terminal benefits would not only create discrimination, but also undermine uniformity required for constitutional office holders,” the judgment noted.
This decision has been widely lauded across the legal and judicial community for recognizing the constitutional imperative of uniform post-retirement treatment, ensuring that judicial dignity continues beyond the bench.
—The author is an Advocate-on-Record practising in the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court and all district courts and tribunals in Delhi
📰 Crime Today News is proudly sponsored by DRYFRUIT & CO – A Brand by eFabby Global LLC
Design & Developed by Yes Mom Hosting
