In a landmark judgment delivered on May 19, 2025, the Supreme Court of India ruled that all High Court judges, including additional judges, are entitled to full pension and retirement benefits, irrespective of their appointment timing or designation. The decision marks a major step in upholding the constitutional right to equality and removing disparities that existed in the judiciary’s post-retirement benefits.
Why in News?
The Supreme Court’s decision holds national significance as it: Eliminates pension-related discrimination among judges based on appointment timing or whether they retired as additional or permanent judges. Recognizes equal service and contribution of judges from both the Bar and district judiciary. Reinforces Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
Background
- High Court judges in India are either appointed as permanent judges or additional judges.
- Additional judges are often appointed to address a temporary increase in workload.
- Until now, only permanent judges were eligible for full pension, creating a disparity.
Key Rulings by the Supreme Court
- Full pension and retirement benefits to all High Court judges, including those who served as additional judges.
No distinction based on,
- Date of appointment.
- Status as permanent or additional judge.
- Mode of elevation (from Bar or district judiciary).
- Families of deceased additional judges will also be entitled to full benefits.
- Judges under the New Pension Scheme (NPS) will also receive full pension.
Constitutional Basis
- The decision relies on Article 14 (Right to Equality) of the Indian Constitution.
- The court also referred to Article 200, which deals with the pension for retired High Court judges.
Financial Ruling
- Former Chief Justices of High Courts to receive ₹15 lakh per annum.
- Other High Court judges to receive ₹13.5 lakh per annum.
Case Details
- Case: In Re: Re-fixation Of Pension Considering Service Period In District Judiciary and High Court
- Judgment reserved: January 28, 2025
- Judgment pronounced: May 19, 2025
- Petitioners highlighted discrepancies in pensions between judges from district judiciary and those from the Bar.