The Supreme Court, in a significant decision on Monday, ruled that lawyers appointed as judges will be entitled to higher pension and post-retirement benefits, commensurate with their counterparts who get promoted from the subordinate judiciary.
Introducing the one-rank one-pension for High Court judges, irrespective of whether they are appointed from the lower courts or the Bench, the apex bench made the 10 year practice as lawyers to be accounted for calculating pension and retirement benefits of judges. The rule will be made effective from April 1, 2004 onwards.
“The meager pension for judges drawn from the Bar and served for less than 12 years on the Bench adversely affects the image of the judiciary,” said the Bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justices Ranjan Gogoi and NV Ramana. The court was conscious to the fact that becoming a judge is a tough call to take for advocates, who have to decide so when they are 50-55 years. This is the stage when they have attained pre-eminence at the Bar and it becomes difficult to sacrifice a lucrative practice.
Finding this to be a disincentive for good advocates to serve as judges, besides the same being “discriminatory” and a violation of Article 14 (right to equality), the Bench held, “One rank one pension must be the norm in respect of a Constitutional office.”
India has the lowest judge per million population ratio in the world. Recently, the Prime Minister had agreed in principle to increase this pitiable figure which stood at 13 judges per million. The bench said, “lawyers who attain distinction in the profession may not, because of this anomaly, accept the office of judgeship,” adding, “when capable lawyers do not show inclination towards Judgeship, the quality of justice declines.”