Second Appeal is Not a Forum for Rehearing or Reassessment of Evidence: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Partition Suit Appeal Failure of Justice Must Be Proved, Not Assumed: Calcutta High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Despite Charge Framing Lapse Bail is the Rule, Refusal is an Exception – Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored: Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Ivory Coast National in NDPS Case Courts Must Adopt a Justice-Oriented Approach in Matrimonial Cases: Gauhati High Court Condones Delay in Family Court Appeal FIR Quashing | Breath Analyzer Test Alone Cannot Prove Alcohol Consumption: Patna High Court Quashes FIR Under Bihar Prohibition Law Unregistered Writing Cannot Confer Ownership: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Dispute Allegations of Stalking and Criminal Intimidation Must Be Tested at Trial: Gujarat High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Nestlé Officials Over Maggi Noodles Controversy No Shortcuts in NDPS Investigations – J&K High Court Rebukes Casual Approach of Investigating Officers Sessions Court Cannot Order Re-Investigation: Allahabad High Court Quashes Direction Against Jaypee Hospital If Official Witnesses Are Reliable, Independent Corroboration Is Not a Must:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NDPS Conviction No Service Tax Can Be Levied on Sale of Lottery Tickets: Supreme Court Rules That Lottery Distributors Are Not Agents Courts Cannot Be Silent Spectators When Justice Is Denied Due to Procedural Errors:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Recall of Bail Rejection Order Section 27 of the Evidence Act Requires Independent Corroboration—Mere Claims by Police Are Not Enough: Supreme Court on Flawed Investigation Confession to Police Is No Confession in Law: Supreme Court Acquits Man, Citing Inadmissibility of Statements Made in Custody Mere 'Last Seen Together' Is Not Enough for Conviction Unless It Forms a Complete Chain of Circumstantial Evidence: Supreme Court Sets Aside Life Sentence in 16-Year-Old Girl’s Murder Failure to Explain Wife’s Death Strengthens Guilt Under Section 106 of Evidence Act" – Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case Child Witness Testimony Cannot Be Discarded Solely on Grounds of Tutoring: Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case

Supreme Court Accepts Recommendations for Revision of Pension and Retirement Benefits for Judicial Officers

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On May 19, 2023, In a significant decision, the Supreme Court of India has accepted the recommendations made by the Commission for the revision of pension and retirement benefits for judicial officers. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice V. Ramasubramanian, and Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, issued the verdict on May 19, 2023.

The judgment primarily focuses on various aspects related to pension, family pension, gratuity, and financial assistance in case of death for judicial officers. The Court emphasized the need for uniformity and parity in the pension and retirement benefits across different jurisdictions. The key highlights of the judgment are as follows:

No Change in Percentage of Pension: The Court upheld the current percentage of pension, fixed at 50% of the last drawn pay for pension and 30% for family pension, for retirees on or after January 1, 2016 (Para 86).

Revised Pension: The Court accepted the recommendation that the revised pension for retired judicial officers should be 50% of the last drawn pay of the post held at the time of retirement (Para 87).

Multiplier and Fitment of Pensioners in Pay Matrix: The Court endorsed the application of a multiplier of 2.81 to pensioners and the fitting of pensioners into the pay matrix, ensuring parity among judicial officers who retired at the same level but under different pay scales (Para 88-90).

Consequential Re-fixation of Judicial Officers: The Court directed the states to extend the benefits of re-fixation of pension to those judicial officers who retired before January 1, 1996, if it has not already been done (Para 91-92).

Benefit of Years of Practice at the Bar: The Court accepted the recommendation to consider the number of years of practice at the Bar, subject to a maximum weightage of ten years, while calculating pension and other retiral benefits for direct recruits of Higher Judicial Services (Para 93).

Family Pension: The Court upheld the existing percentage of family pension at 30% of the last drawn pay and recommended the payment of family pension to eligible family members after the death of the spouse (Para 94-95).

Additional Quantum of Pension/Family Pension: The Court accepted the recommendation for the payment of an additional quantum of pension from the age of 75 years onwards, with the possibility for states to continue providing the benefit up to the age of 75 years (Para 98-102).

Gratuity: The Court directed the calculation of gratuity on par with the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, with a maximum limit of Rs. 20 lakhs, subject to an increase of 25% whenever DA rises by 50% (Para 103-104).

Retirement Age: The Court did not recommend any change in the retirement age of judicial officers, which remains at 60 years (Para 107).

Financial Assistance in Case of Death: The Court accepted the recommendation for the payment of family pension and death cum retirement gratuity to the spouse/dependent of a deceased judicial officer (Para 108).

The Court directed the concerned authorities, including the High Courts and states, to implement the necessary amendments in the Service Rules within three months. Compliance affidavits regarding the clearance of arrears of pay and the revised rates of pension must be filed within four months. The revised rates of pension will be payable from July 1, 2023, and the payment of arrears will be completed in three installments by December 31, 2023.

Date of Decision: May 19, 2023

All India Judges Association   vs    Union of India & Ors.       

Similar News