Supreme Court Ensures Equal Pension Rights for Judges: Includes High Court Service for Pension of Former District Judge

In a significant decision enhancing the rights of judiciary members, the Supreme Court, comprising Justices Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J B Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, ruled on 15th March 2024 in the case Union of India vs Justice (Retd) Raj Rahul Garg (Raj Rani Jain). The judgment addressed a pivotal issue in the pension computation of a High Court Judge, Justice Garg, who previously served as a District Judge, delving into the inclusion of her entire service duration and last drawn salary in pension calculations.

Legal Point: The core legal question revolved around whether the service period of a former District Judge, later appointed as a High Court Judge, should be included in the computation of pensionary benefits under the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954.

Facts and Issues: Justice Garg, appointed as a Judicial Magistrate in 1981, ascended to a District Judge in 2010 and retired in 2014. She was subsequently appointed as a High Court Judge, serving until 2016. The Union of India contested her pension computation, considering the gap between her services as a break, thereby excluding her High Court tenure for pension purposes.

The Supreme Court's detailed analysis touched on several pivotal points:

Article 217 and 221 Interpretation: The Court examined these constitutional provisions concerning the appointment of High Court Judges and their entitlement to salaries, allowances, and pensions.

Interpretation of Pensionable Service: The judgment interpreted Sections 14 and 15 of the Act, focusing on whether the service period as a High Court Judge should be included alongside the service as a District Judge for pension calculations, despite a service break.

Principle of Non-Discrimination: The Court highlighted the importance of non-discriminatory treatment in pension calculation, emphasizing that Judges, irrespective of their elevation origin, should be accorded equal treatment.

Decision: The Court held that Justice Garg's service as a High Court Judge should be combined with her tenure as a District Judge for pension computation, and this should be based on her last drawn salary as a High Court Judge. The break in service was ruled not to adversely impact the pension computation. The Court underscored the principle of non-discrimination, ensuring parity between Judges elevated from the district judiciary and the bar.

Date of Decision: 15th March 2024

Union of India, Ministry of Law & Justice vs Justice (Retd) Raj Rahul Garg (Raj Rani Jain) and Others