13 November 1991
Supreme Court
Download

ALL INDIA JUDGES ASSON. Vs UNION OF INDIA

Case number: W.P.(C) No.-001022-001022 / 1989
Diary number: 60181 / 1989
Advocates: A. T. M. SAMPATH Vs A. SUBHASHINI


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 22  

PETITIONER: ALL INDIA JUDGES’ ASSOCIATION

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA

DATE OF JUDGMENT13/11/1991

BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) AHMADI, A.M. (J) SAWANT, P.B.

CITATION:  1992 AIR  165            1991 SCR  Supl. (2) 206  1992 SCC  (1) 119        JT 1991 (4)   285  1991 SCALE  (2)969

ACT: Judicial  service-Subordinate  Judiciary--Judge---Duty---Na- ture.     Judicial Service--Subordinate Judiciary--Role and  obli- gations  of  District judge and role and position  of  Trial Judge  in administration of Justice--Role of High  Court  in the functioning of subordinate Judiciary, indicated.     Constitution  of India,  1950---Article  50---Separation of   Judicial--Effect--Judicial  Service  whether   separate class.     Constitution  of  India, 1950---Articles  233,  234,235, 236,      Concurrent      List--Entry       11---Subordinate Judiciay--Directions for setting up of an All India Judicial Service  and for bringing about certain service  conditions- Reasons indicated.     Judicial Service---Subordinate Judiciary--Directions for setting  up of an All India Judicial Service and  In-service Institute, uniformity in designations and pay scales,  fixa- tion  of retirement age at 60 years, facilities of  residen- tial  accommodation, transportation and working  library  at the residence of Judicial Officer--Reasons indicated.

HEADNOTE:     The petitioners--All India Judges’ Association filed  an application  under Article 32 of the Constitution  of  India for directions of this Court for setting up of an All  India Judicial  Service, for bringing about uniform conditions  of service for members of the subordinate judiciary,  provision of  residential accommodation, transport  facility;  library and in service training for judicial officers. Disposing of the writ petition, this Court,     HELD:  1.  For a civilised society an enlightened  inde- pendent judiciary is totally indispensable. 1231 A]   2. Rendering justice is a difficult job. Unless the  judi- cial officer              207 has  a reasonably worry free mental condition, it  would  be difficult to expect unsoiled justice from his hands. [223 C]     3.   A judge ought to be wise enough to know that he  is fallible  and, therefore, even ready to learn and be  coura-

2

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 22  

geous enough to acknowledge his errors. The conduct of every judicial  officer  should be above reproach.  He  should  be coscientious, studious, thorough, courteous, patient,  punc- tual, just, impartial fearless of public clamour, regardless of  public praise and indifferent to private,  political  or partisan influences; he should administer justice  according to law, and deal with his appointment as a public trust;  he should  not allow other affairs or his private interests  to interfere  with  the prompt and proper  performance  of  his judicial duties, nor should he administer the office for the purpose  of advancing his personal ambitions  or  increasing his popularity. [231 F-H]     4.   Under the Constitution, the concept of Rule of  Law came to be accepted and developed. Article 50 prescribed the guideline of separating "the judiciary from the executive in the  public  services of the State". This  position  is  the outcome  of recognition of the fact that the judiciary is  a class separate from the executive. [211 D]     5.   The Trial Judge is the kingpin in the  hierarchical system  of administration of justice. He directly  comes  in contact  with the litigant during the proceedings in  Court. On  him lies the responsibility of building up of  the  case appropriately  and  on his understanding of the  matter  the cause of justice is first answered. The personality,  knowl- edge,  judicial restraint, capacity to maintain dignity  are the  additional  aspects which go into  making  the  courts’ functioning successful. [225 F-G]     6.  The District Judge is the principal judicial officer of the district. It is the obligation of the district  judge to operate as the captain of the team both under his  direct supervision at the headquarters and in respect of the  offi- cers  located  in different areas within  his  district.  Of late,  lower or subordinate courts are being established  in the outlying and rural interior. It is the obligation of the district judge to inspect the outlying courts, maintain  the proper  judicial  tempo  and temper of  functioning  in  his district and be responsible 1or the efficient running of the system. [221 G-222 A]     7.   The High Courts must take greater interest  in  the proper functioning of the subordinate judiciary.  Inspection should not be a matter of casual attention. The Constitution has vested the control of 208 the  subordinate  judiciary under Article 235  in  the  High Court  as  a whole and not its Chief  Justice  alone.  Every Judge  should,  therefore,  take adequate  interest  in  the institution  which is placed under the control of  the  High Court. The administrative control of the subordinate  courts of the State vests not in the Chief Justice alone but in the Court over which the Chief Justice presides. [231 A-C]     8.  There is a marked distinction between the nature  of work  which  executive officers and  judicial  officers  are called upon to discharge. The work of the judicial  officers is  usually  sedantry while that of  the  executive  officer involves a lot of physical movement. This is particularly so in  the lower cadres of both the services. In view  of  this feature physical fitness is more important for an  executive officer than in case of a judicial officer while in case  of judicial officers, there is thus necessarily more of  mental activity  than  physical.  Experience  is  an  indispensable factor and subject to the basic physical fitness with  grow- ing age experience grows. [217 D-E]     9.   Today a judicial officer always looks at life in  a comparative  way  with administrative officers of  his  age. Professional income at the Bar has tremendously swelled  up.

3

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 22  

Very  often counsel’s fee per day equals to the salary of  a judicial  officer for a full month or even a longer  period. This  great disparity affects peace and equilibrium  in  the judicial operation. [227 D]     10.  It  is absolutely necessary that the  Judge  enjoys freedom from personal worries. A reasonable salary appropri- ate allowances and manageable living conditions are,  there- fore, required to be provided. [226 E]     11.  An All India Judical Service should be set  up  and the  Union  of India should take appropriate steps  in  this regard. [232 C]     12.  Steps should be taken to bring about uniformity  in designation of officers both in civil and the criminal  side by 31.3.1993. [232 C]     13. Retirement age of judicial officers be raised to  60 years and appropriate steps be taken by 31.12.1992. [232 C]     14.  As and when the Pay Commissions/Committees are  set up  in  the States and Union Territories;  the  question  of appropriate pay scales of judicial officers be  specifically referred and considered. [232 D]                209     15. A working library at the residence of every judicial officer  has  to  be provided by  30.6.1992.  Provision  for sumptuary allowance has to be made. [232 D]     16. Residential accommodation to every judicial  officer has  to be provided and until State accommodation is  avail- able. Government should provide requisitioned  accommodation for them by 31.12.1992. In providing residential  accommoda- tion, availability of an office room should be kept in view. [232 E]     17.  Every District Judge and Chief Judicial  Magistrate should have a State vehicle, Judicial officers in sets of  5 should  have a pool vehicle and others would be entitled  to suitable  loans  to acquire two wheeler  automobiles  within different time limits. [232 F]     18.  In service Insititute should be set up  within  one year at the Central and State or Union Territory level. [232 G]     The Law Commission of India - 14th Report, 1958  Judges: by  Professor  Pannick;  Law  Commission  of  India,  1  Ith Report--referred to.     Moti  Ram Deka, etc. v. The General Manager, North  East Frontier  Railway, Maligaon, Pandu, etc., [1964] 5 SCR  683; Secretary, Government of Madras, Home Department and ,Anoth- er  v.  Zenith Lamps and Electrical Ltd., AIR 1973  SC  724; Devi  Prasad  Sharma and Others v. The King Emperor,  70  IA 216; Baradakanta Mishra  The Registrar of Orissa, High Court and Another, [1974] 2 SCR 282, referred to.

JUDGMENT: ORIGINAL  JURISDICTION:  Writ Petition (Civil) No.  1022  of 1989. (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).     Sri  Ramulu,  A.T.M. Sampath, A.K. Srivastava  and  Raju Ramchandran for the Petitioners.     Tapas  Ray, R.N. Sachthey, P.S. Poti, Yogeshwar  Prasad, V.C. Mahajan, U.N. Bachswat, A.S. Nambiar, Kailash  Vasudev, Ms.  A.  Subhashini, Hemantika Wahi,  Vasudata  Talib,  Anip Sachthey,  T.T. Kunhikannan, Ms. Rachna Gupta, Mrs. S.  Dik- shit,  Ms. S. Janani, Ms. Urmila Kapoor, M.  Veerappa,  K.H. Nobin Singh, Ashok Singh, S.K. Agnihotri, Aruneshwar  Gupta, K.C. Bajaj, Ms. Renu George, K. Chaudhary, A.S. Bhasme, H.S. Munjral, G.K. Bansal, R. Mohan, P.K. Manohar, Ms. S. Vasude-

4

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 22  

van,  B.  Parthasarthy, V. Krishnamurthy, A.K.  Panda,  J.R. Das, D.K. Sinha, D.N. 210 Mukherjee,  Gopal Singh, P. Chowdhary, Indra Makwana and  K. Swamy for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by/1     RANGANATH MISHRA, CJ. This application under Article  32 of the Constitution is by the All India Judges,  Association and its working President for reliefs through directions for setting up of an All India Judicial Service and for bringing about  uniform  conditions  of service for  members  of  the subordinate judiciary throughout the country.     Rule having been granted, notice was issued to the Union of  India and all the States and Union territories. Most  of them have responded by making returns to the Rule. A few  of the  States  have  taken the stand that  they  would  accept whatever  this  Court ultimately decides while  others  have placed  their view points and yet some others have  objected to the reliefs claimed.     Mr. Sri Ramulu, Chairman of the All India Judges,  Asso- ciation  personally appeared at the hearing. Mr.  Raju  Ram- chandran on our request appeared to support the petition  as amicus  curiae. At the hearing the standing Counsel for  the several states and Union Territories have also been heard.     The plea for setting up of an All India Judicial Service was not seriously pressed and reliefs on the following heads were claimed:                1.  Uniformity in the Judicial cadres in  the               different States and Un-                    ion Territories;                2.   An appropriate enhanced uniform  age  of               retirement   for                the   Judicial               Officers throughout the country;               3.   Uniform pay scales as far as possible  to               be fixed;                4.  Residential accommodation to be  provided               to every Judicial Officer.                5.   Transport facility to be made  available               and conveyance allowance provided.                6.   Adequate perks by way of Library  Allow-               ance, Residential  Office Allowance and  Sump-               tuary Allowance to be provided.                7.   Provision for inservice training  to  be               made.     Administration of justice and orgamsation of courts  was a  provincial  subject under the Government  of  India  Act, 1935. The Constitution adopted 211 the  same scheme by providing in Entry 3 of List 11  of  the Seventh  Schedule the subject of administration of  justice, constitution  and organisation of all courts  excepting  the Supreme Court and the High Courts as a State subject. It was only under the 42nd Amendment in 1977 that Entry 3 from List I1  was deleted and the subject as such was taken  as  Entry 11-A  in the Concurrent List. This had become  necessary  on account of the recommendation of the Law Commission that  an All India Judicial Service should be set up.     Prior  to  independence, the District Judge used  to  be invariably  a  Member of the Indian Civil  Service  and  his position  in the district was superior to that of  the  Dis- trict  Magistrate. This position continued until the  Indian Civil Service came to be abolished around 1946-47. This long association  of the Civil Service with the judicial  manning had led to service conditions of both to be tied up.  Crimi- nal  justice  at that time was handled  by  Magistrates  who

5

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 22  

belonged to the Executive.     Under the Constitution, the concept of Rule of Law  came to  be  accepted and developed. Article  50  prescribed  the guideline of separating the judiciary from the executive  in the  public  services  of the State. This  position  is  the outcome  of recognition of the fact that the judiciary is  a class separate from the executive.     The  control  over the subordinate  judiciary  has  been vested in the High Court and the administrative control  has been construed to be complete and exclusive. Yet, in certain aspects,  and particularly in regard to service  conditions, the  distinction has not been maintained; That is  why  very often  when  any specific aspect relating to  conditions  of service  is  taken up or benefits for  judicial  service  is considered, comparative basis between the two is adopted for review. It is high time that this aspect is appreciated  and the administrative authorities remain alive to it.     We  shall first deal with the plea for setting up of  an All  India Judicial Service. The Law Commission of India  in its 14th Report in the year 1953 said:               "If  we  are to improve the personnel  of  the               subordinate  judiciary,  we  must  first  take               measures  to  extend  or widen  our  field  of               selection  so that we can draw from it  really               capable person. A radical measure suggested to               us was to recruit the judicial service entire-               ly  by a competitive test or  examination.  It               was               212               suggested  that the higher judiciary could  be               drawn from such competitive tests at the  all-               India  level  and the lower judiciary  can  be               recruited  by  similar  tests  held  at  State               level. Those eligible for these tests would be               graduates who have taken a law degree and  the               requirement  of practice at the Bar should  be               done away with.               Such  a scheme, it was urged, would result  in               bringing into the subordinate judiciary  capa-               ble young men who now prefer to obtain immedi-               ate  remunerative employment in the  executive               branch of Government and in private commercial               firms.  The scheme, it was pointed out,  would               bring to the higher subordinate judiciary  the               best  talent  available in the  country  as  a               whole, whereas the lower subordinate judiciary               would be drawn from the best talent  available               in the Slate".               The Commission proceeded to further state:               "Recruitment  to the higher judiciary  at  the               all-India level in the manner suggested  would               be a powerful unifying influence and serve  to               counteract   the  existing  growing   regional               tendencies. In this connection, attention  may               be  drawn  to  the observations  made  by  the               States Reorganisation Commission in regard  to               the  creation of the All India Services  as  a               major compelling necessity for the nation. The               Commission  observed:.  "The  raisond"etre  of               creating  All India Services, individually  or               in groups, is that officers on whom the  brunt               of   responsibility  of  administration   will               inevitably  fail, may develop a wide and  all-               India  outlook  ....  The present emphasis  on               regional  languages in the  Universities  will

6

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 22  

             inevitably  lead  to the growth  of  parochial               attitude,  which will only be corrected  by  a               system  of training which emphasises the  all-               India  point of view  ..........  It  has  not               been very easy for us to balance these consid-               erations,  but we are definitely of  the  view               that proportion of the higher judiciary should               be recruited by competitive examination at the               all-India  level so as to attract the best  of               our  young graduates to the judicial  service.               This measure will enlarge the field of  selec-               tion  and  bring  into  file  higher  judicial               service  a leaven of brilliant young  men  who               will set a higher tone and level to the subor-               dinate judiciary as a whole. The personnel  so               recruited  will be subjected to .’m  intensive               training.  The  rest of the  higher  judiciary               should,  in  our view, be  recruited  in  part               directly  from senior members of the Bar,  and               partly by promotion from the lower subordinate               judiciary".               213                   Dealing  with  the  same  subject  from  a               different  angle, the Commission proceeded  to               say:               "The great advantage that the Indian  civilian               had,  was the intensive and varied  course  of               training which he had to undergo. At the  time               of his first entry into service, his  training               was  confined  to matters  pertaining  to  the               revenue and criminal administration alone, but               when  he was taken over to the judicial  side,               generally  an  equally intensive  training  in               civil law was given to him for a period of not               less  than  eighteen months. There can  be  no               doubt that a similar intensive judicial train-               ing given to a judicial officer who  possesses               a   law   degree  can  be  of   the   greatest               value   ..........  Indeed, it can be  claimed               that a planned and systematic training such as               is contemplated by us for the judicial officer               selected  for the Indian Judicial Service  may               be  more  effective  than  the  uncertain  and               spasmodic  training  which  may  be   received               during  the course of a few years practice  at               the  Bar. These and the  other  considerations               referred to earlier have led us to the conclu-               sion  that in the interests of the  efficiency               of the subordinate judiciary, it is  necessary               that  an All India Service called  the  Indian               Judicial  Service should be established.  This               will  need  action being taken in  the  manner               provided by Article 312 of the Constitution".     The  Law Commission has reiterated this view  in  subse- quent reports. It took nearly 20 years for the Government to take follow up action on the basis of the recommendation and that  led  to the amendment of the  legislafive  entries  as already referred to.     This  proposal of the Law Commission and the  follow  up governmental action led to consultation and dialogue in  the Conference of Chief Justices of the High Courts but many  of the  High Courts were of the view that setting up of an  All India  Judicial  Service  would  affect  the  constitutional scheme  of control of the High Courts over  the  subordinate judiciary and in particular Article 235 of the Constitution.

7

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 22  

Article  233  makes provision for  appointment  of  District Judges and requires that appointment to such posts has to be made  by the Governor of the State in consultation with  the appropriate High Court. Article 234 provides for recruitment of persons other than District Judges to judicial service by prescribing that appointments shall be made by the  Governor of  the  State in accordance with the Rules made by  him  in that  behalf after consulting the State Public Service  Com- mission  and the High Court exercising the  jurisdiction  in relation  to  such  State. The post of  District  Judge  has ordinarily been equated with the senior scale status in  the All India Services. It was 214 perhaps  not  contemplated  by the Law  Commission  that  on appointment  members  of  the proposed  All  India  Judicial Service  were to hold the post of District Judge.  Like  all other All India Services the initial recruitment could be to a lower rank equal to civil judge and after serving in  such post  for a reasonable time appointment to the post of  Dis- trict  Judge could be made. Since the Law Commission  itself was  of  the view that a percentage should be filled  up  by direct recruitment from the Bar, the scheme envisaged by the Law  Commission would not require amendment of Article  233. It is to be examined whether any alterations in Article  234 would be necessary or recruitment to All India Service could be made by appropriate amendment of the State Rules  contem- plated under that Article.     Control over the subordinate courts under the  constitu- tional mechanism is vested in the High Court. Under  Article 235, the provision is that the control over District  Courts and courts subordinate thereto vests in the High Court.  The main objection against implementation of the  recommendation of the Law Commission relating to the setting up of the  All India  Judicial  Service  was founded upon  the  basis  that control  contemplated under Article 235 of the  Constitution would  be affected if an All India Judicial Service  on  the pattern of All India Services Act, 1951, is created. We  are of the view that the Law Commission’s recommendation  should not  have been dropped lightly. There is considerable  force and  merit in the view expressed by the Law  Commission.  An All  India  Judicial  Service essentially  for  manning  the higher  services in the subordinate judiciary is  very  much necessary.  The reasons advanced by the Law  Commission  for recommending the setting up of an All India Judicial Service appeal to us.     Since  the  setting up of such a service  might  require amendment  of the relevant Articles of the Constitution  and might even require alteration of the Service Rules operating in  the  different States and Union Territories, we  do  not intend  to give any particular direction on this score  par- ticularly  when the point was not seriously pressed  but  we would commend to the Union of India to undertake appropriate exercise  quickly so that the feasibility of  implementation of the recommendations of the Law Commission may be examined expeditiously and implemented as early as possible. It is in the interest of the health of the judiciary. throughout  the country that this should be done. II     The  Law Commission in the 14th Report also referred  to the  various  designations provided  for  judicial  officers working  in the different States and Union  Territories-  It observed: 215               "In view of the more or less uniform functions               performed by the judicial officers so various-

8

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 22  

             ly designated, it would, we think, be  advisa-               ble  to  aim at a uniformity  of  designation.               There is, however, a fundamental difference in               the general scheme of distribution of judicial               business  between the tower grade of  officers               (munsifs)  on  the one hand,  and  the  higher               grade of officers (subordinate judges) on  the               other. The first has limited pecuniary  juris-               diction while the second, generally  speaking,               has   unlimited  pecuniary  jurisdiction.   We               would, therefore, suggest that the State Judi-               cial Service-Class II should consist of  civil               judges  who  should  be  designated  as  civil               judges  of  the senior and  junior  divisions.               Officers  corresponding  to munsifs  would  be               designated  as civil judges (junior  division)               and those corresponding to subordinate  judges               would  be designated as civil  judges  (senior               division)".     If reference is made to Article 236 of the Constitution, it would be noticed that the expression "District Judge" has been  defined to include Judge of a City Civil Court,  Addi- tional  District  Judge,  Joint  District  Judge,  Assistant District  Judge, Chief Judge of a Small Causes Court,  Chief Presidency  Magistrate, Additional Chief  Presidency  Magis- trate, Sessions Judge, Additional Sessions Judge and Assist- ant  Sessions Judge. This definition in Article  236  covers the higher section of the State Judicial Service both in the civil  and criminal sides. The definition is only  inclusive and  in implementing the recommendations of the Law  Commis- sion  to  simplify  the  designations  by  saying  that  the hierarchy of subordinate judicial officers would be District Judge  or Additional District Judge, below him  Civil  Judge (Senior  Division) and below him Civil Judge  (junior  divi- sion) does not go against the constitutional scheme nor does it  require any amendment of the Constitution. If  there  be any laws operating in the States, perhaps the same may  have to  be appropriately modified or altered if  the  uniformity recommended by the Law Commission has to work out.     We are inclined to adopt the view of the Law Commission. On  the civil side, the State Judicial  Service,  therefore, should  be  classified as District  or  Additional  District Judge, Civil Judge (senior division) and Civil Judge (Junior division). On the criminal side, there should be a  Sessions Judge  or  Additional  Sessions Judge and  below  him  there should  be  the Chief Judicial  Magistrate  and  Magistrates provided for in the Code of Criminal Procedure.  Appropriate adjustments, if any, may be made of existing posts by  indi- cating  their equivalence with any of these categories.  The process of bringing about such uniformity would require some time 216 and perhaps some monitoring. We direct that the Ministry  of Law  and Justice of the Union Government would carry on  the monitoring activity and all the States and Union Territories would follow the pattern indicated above by March 31, 1993. III     One of the issues debated at the hearing related to  the age  of  retirement. The Constitution has fixed the  age  of retirement  of  Judges in the High Courts  and  the  Supreme Court at 62 and 65 years respectively. There is no constitu- tional prescription of the age of retirement of the  members of the subordinate judiciary and in India that is controlled by the relevant rules obtaining in the different States  and Union Territories and it is 58 years at present excepting in

9

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 22  

the  State of Kerala where the age of superannuation  is  55 years  for  all  State Government  employees  including  the members of the State Judicial Service.     It  is  the  claim of the petitioners that  the  age  of retirement  of  the officers of  the  subordinate  judiciary should be fixed at 60 years inasmuch as the basic qualifica- tion  for recruitment to the service requires every  officer to  have in the minimum a bachelors degree in law  which  is acquirable after becoming a graduate. Thus, while for normal civil service a graduate is eligible, for recruitment to the judicial  service  a minimum further period of  three  years becomes  necessary  to acquire the basic  qualification.  In many  of the states and the Union Territories, for  recruit- ment  to the post in the judicial service a basic period  of experience  at the Bar is a pre-requisite. Thus,  while  for the  civil service the age of recruitment varies between  25 and  28 years, for judicial service at the basic level  most of  the States permit entry upto the age of 32. In  some  of the States where direct recruitment of judicial officers for an  in between stage is permitted, the age of entry is  even upto 35 years. Article 233(2) of the Constitution provides:               "A person not already in service of the  Union               or  of the State shall only be eligible to  be               appointed a District Judge if he has been  for               not  less  than seven years an advocate  or  a               pleader  and is recommended by the High  Court               for appointment".     Keeping  this  constitutional  requirement  in  view  in respect  of direct recruitment for District judge,  entrance is  permitted upto a later age in many States. Thus  at  the point  of entry into service there is a  marked  distinction between civil service and the judicial service. Notwithstanding  these special features the history  of  the service 217 would show that no distinction has been maintained in regard to  the  age  of retirement between officers  of  the  civil service  and the officers of the judicial service  and  over the years the same rule has been applied to both. This Court in  Moti Ram Deka, etc. v. The General Manager,  North  East Frontier  Railway, Maligaon, Pandu, etc., [1964] 5  SCR  683 pointed out:               "In  regard to the age of  superannuation,  it               may be said prima facie that rules of superan-               nuation  which  are prescribed in  respect  of               public service in all modern States are  based               on considerations of life expectation,  mental               capacity  of the civil servants having  regard               to  the climatic conditions under  which  they               work, and the nature of the work they do. They               are  not fixed on any ad hoc basis and do  not               involve  the exercise of any discretion.  They               apply uniformity to all public servants  fail-               ing  under  the category in respect  of  which               they are framed  .....  "     Nature  of work is thus one of the considerations  rele- vant to fixing the age of retirement.     There is a marked distinction between the nature of work which  executive officers and judicial officers  are  called upon  to  discharge. The work of the  judicial  officers  is usually  sedantry while that of the executive  officers  in- volves  a lot of physical movement. This is particularly  so in  the lower cadres of both the services. In view  of  this feature physical fitness is more important for an  executive officer than in case of a judicial officer while in case  of

10

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 22  

judicial  officers,  there  is thus necessarily  more  of  a mental  activity than physical. Experience is an  indispens- able  factor and subject to the basic physical fitness  with growing age experience grows.     As  already  indicated, retirement age  for  High  Court Judges is 62 years. A sizable portion of the manning in  the High  Court is done by elevating District Judges  and  those who  are  elevated continue upto the age of  62  years  like directly elevated members of the Bar to the High Court.     There  are certain services in the States where  retire- ment is fixed at the age of 60 years taking into account the special  type of work the officers are called upon  to  per- form.  For  instance,  throughout the  country  teachers  of universities  are  allowed to serve upto 60  years  of  age. Employees  under some of the corporations also go  upto  the age of 60. Scientific Research Officers are also allowed  in many cases the benefit of 60 years age of retirement. Mr. Poti for the State of Kerala raised serious objection to raising 218 the age of retirement of judicial officers to a common level of 58 years by contending that this would lead to unrest  in the other services of the State and everyone would press for the age of retirement being enhanced to 58. In fact,  Kerala had once experimented with the enhanced age for all and  has reverted  back to the age of 55. The main ground  raised  by Mr.  Poti to resist the proposal of enhancement is  that  in the State of Kerala the level of literacy is high and  unem- ployment is acute. If the age of retirement is enhanced  the scope of the unemployed to get employment would be adversely affected. We are not impressed by the submission of Mr. Poti on  this  score. The total number of  judicial  officers  of every category in the State may not exceed 3,000 or so. This certainly  is not such a big number that might create  unem- ployment  problem in the event of the age of  superannuation being brought to the all India level of 58 or even  enhanced to a higher limit.     The  Law Commission in its 14th Report dealt  with  this aspect at page 2 13 of the report and said:               "There is yet another reason why the  question               of  the age of retirement of  the  subordinate               judiciary  should be treated differently  from               that  in  other  State  Services.  As  noticed               earlier a judicial officer enters service at a               comparatively higher age than a recuit to  the               executive   or  administrative  services.   It               would,  therefore, be proper that the  retire-               ment  age  of  a judicial  officer  should  be               relatively  higher than that of  an  executive               officer, so as to enable him to serve for  the               full number of years if he retains his fitness               and  capacity  of work till  he  reaches  such               higher age.               We,  therefore, recommend that the  retirement               age of the subordinate judiciary in all States               should  be raised to 58 years. Such a  measure               will tend to raise the tone and morale of  the               judicial  service as a whole. It will also  be               consistent  with our recommendation  to  raise               the age of retirement of High Court Judges  to               65 years."     The  recommendation that superannuation should be  fixed at  58  for  judicial officers was made at a  time  when  in public services retirement was prescribed at the age of  55. Considering  the enhancement of the longevity of human  life

11

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 22  

and  taking all other relevant considerations into  account, all  the States and all the Union Territories have  now  en- hanced  the  age  of retirement to 58  years  excepting,  as already pointed out, in the case of the State of Kerala.  We are  of the view that on the logic which was adopted by  the Law Commission and for the reasons which we have 219 indicated the age of retirement of judicial officers  should be 60 years. We accordingly direct that appropriate  altera- tions shall be made in the Rules obtaining in the States and Union  Territories in respect of judicial service so  as  to fix  the  age  of retirement at 60 years  with  effect  from December  31,  1992.  We have given a long  period  so  that appropriate amendments may be made in the meantime. IV     We  shall  now deal with the claim for  appropriate  pay scales  and  on, as nearly as possible, uniform  basis.  The 14th Report of the Law Commission dealt with this matter  at page 163 of the report and said:               "It  is the matter of scales of pay and  remu-               neration, the judiciary compares  unfavourably               with the executive branches of the Government.               It  is  true  that,  generally  speaking,  the               scales of pay of the judicial officers and the               corresponding executive officers are identical               in  many of the States. However, it has to  be               remembered that the executive officers are, by               and  large,  recruited at a much  younger  age               than the judicial officers. The entrant to the               judicial services is required to be a graduate               in  law and in most of the States it  is  also               necessary that he should have practised for  a               certain  number  of years at the Bar.  On  the               other  hand, for recruitment to the  executive               branches  of Government service, a  degree  in               arts or science is, generally speaking, suffi-               cient.  In the result, a person  entering  the               judicial  service does so when he is about  26               or  27  years of age and at a  time  when  his               contemporaries who have entered the  executive               service  of  the Government have  already  ac-               quired a certain seniority in the service  and               have  come  to draw a higher salary.  It  will               thus  be seen that a person joining the  judi-               cial service starts with a lower  remuneration               than  what  he would have received if  he  had               entered the executive service for a few  years               earlier. It has also to be noted that owing to               the lesser proportion of superior posts in the               judicial service promotions come less  quickly               to the judicial officers, and a person who has               entered the service as a munsif, assuming that               he  is  fit and fully  qualified,  takes  much               longer  time to become a district  judge  than               would an equally competent deputy collector to               reach  the position of a collector. Again  the               judicial  officer, having started at  a  later               age,  has a shorter span of service  than  the               executive officer and this affects his pension               and other retirement benefits". 220     We  had  called  for the prevailing pay  scales  of  the different judicial cadres in the States and the Union Terri- tories and the same have been made available to us. We found that there is wide violence in the pay structure  prevailing

12

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 22  

in the various States and Union Territories and for the same nature  of work performed by the judicial officers they  are remunerated differently. It is difficult for us on the  data now placed to get into the exercise of fixing the  appropri- ate pay scales. We suffer a handicap in the absence of  full details  necessary for fixing the appropriate pay scales  on comparative  basis.  Again, we are apprehensing that  if  we enter  into the matter and say something in a final way,  it is  possible  that  in some States benefits  which  are  now available  may be taken away or adversely affect some  offi- cers. For these reasons, we do not propose to finally  exam- ine  the  propriety  of the existing pay scales  nor  do  we direct any pay scales to be fixed.     A  Pay Commission for the Central  Government  employees was  appointed  about 8 years back and on the basis  of  its Report  the revised benefits have been given effect to  from January 1, 1986. Following that pattern, most of the  States have either given the Central scales or appointed their  own commissions or committees and given the revised benefits  to their officers. It appears that with an interval of 10 years or  so such a commission is being appointed and  pay  scales are being reviewed. Such an exercise is likely to be  under- taken  within less than three or four years. We are  of  the view that the claim on this score can be better handled when the  pay commissions or committees in the States are set  up to  review  the position. We direct that as  and  when  such commissions or committees are set up in the States and Union Territories  hereafter, they separately examine  and  review the  pay structure of judicial officers keeping in view  all relevant aspects. V.     Under this head, however, we would like to deal with the claim  for  various allowances.  Unlike  the  administrative officer,  the judicial officer is obliged to work  for  long hours at home. When he reserves a judgment he has usually to prepare the same at his residence. For that purpose, he  has to read the records as also the judicial precedents cited by counsel  for the adversaries. Even otherwise with a view  to keeping himself uptodate about the legal position he has  to read judgments of his own High Court, other High Courts  and of  the Supreme Court. He has also to read  legal  journals. The  judicial  officer  very often has no  provision  of  an officer  at his residence. Unless a reasonable allowance  is provided for maintaining an office, it became very difficult for him to undertake the various aspects 221 of the exercise referred to above. We are of the view that a residential  office allowance should be admissible to  every judicial  officer.  The  same for the  civil  judge  (junior division) and the civil judge (senior division) be fixed  at the  rate  of Rs. 250 per month and officers of  the  higher category the monthly allowance should be Rs. 300.     Law books, Law repons and legal journals are  indispens- able  to a judicial officer. They are in fact his tools  and in case a junior officer has to discharge his duties  satis- factorily  he has to get acquainted with these. His  ability to  perform his duty to a considerable extent  depends  upon his  reading habit and devoting a sizeable working  time  to reading all this literature. Reading habit is  indispensable to  a judicial officer and possession of a small library  of one’s own helps generation of the proper reading habit.  Law books and Law journals have in particular become very costly these  days. One standard Law journal for the  decisions  of the High Court, another for the decisions of this Court  and one  or two Standard Law journals on the average would  cost

13

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 22  

about Rs. 200 a month.     There  is no existing system of providing Law books  and journals to the officers of the lower judiciary. Many of the judicial  officers  in the lower ranks  have  their  working places away from the district headquarters where the seat of the  district  judge is located. There is perhaps  at  every district headquarter a small library but the number of books is  small and more than one copy of many of the books  would not  be available. Therefore, whether it is at the  district headquarter  or in areas away therefrom,  effective  library facility is not available. We are of the view that a uniform pattern  of small library should be provided to every  judi- cial  officer.  We accordingly direct  that such  a  library shall  be  made  available by 30.6.2992  to  every  judicial officer and the District Judge should have provision made in his budget for the said residential library for every  judi- cial officer under his control. The High Court should  moni- tor this aspect effectively so that without loss of time,  a handy  library  may  be at the disposal  of  every  judicial officer.     The District Judge is the principal judicial officer  of the  district. Ordinarily every revenue district has a  dis- trict  judge and his seat is located at the headquarter.  In heavy stations, the district judge has a team of  additional district judges to assist him. There would also be a  number of  judicial  officers of lower categories  working  at  the headquarters. It is the obligation of the district judge  to operate  as  the captain of the team both under  his  direct supervision  at the headquaters and in respect of the  offi- cers  located  in different areas within  his  district.  Of late,  lower or subordinate courts are being established  in the outlying and rural interior. It is the 222 obligation  of  the district judge to inspect  the  outlying courts,  maintain  the proper judicial tempo and  temper  of functioning  in  his  district and be  responsible  for  the efficient running of the system.     In  many of the States the prevailing practice  is  that the district judge takes a monthly meeting with the  collec- tor  and district magistrate and the superintendent  of  po- lice. He also meets the members of the Bar. Now and then  he meets  his judicial officers  those at the  headquarters  as also  the  others who are in the interior. It  is  desirable that  the district judge devotes some time as frequently  as possible  and  at  least once a week to  meet  the  judicial officers  beyond the working hours, discusses working  prob- lems  of his officers and  forms his own opinion  about  now the work is being done. A weekly assessment of such perform- ance generates even temper of judicial activity and  upholds the  tempo being maintained at the appropriate level.  There is not yet any definite system of judicial training in  most of the States and Union Territories. A judicial officer with his  first posting or until he acquires adequate  experience requires guidance. It should ultimately be the obligation of the  district judge to provide the same, we are of the  view that  to the post of district judge a monthly  allowance  of Rs. 300 by way of sumptuary allowance should be available to enable him to extend small courtesies at such meetings.  The chief  judicial magistrate does some of these activities  in respect  of the magistrates handling criminal work.  In  our opinion he should be entitled to a sum of Rs. 200 per  month by way of sumptuary allowance. We are aware of the fact that under the conditions of Service Act of High Court Judges,  a sumptuary  allowance  of Rs. 300 is payable  to  them  every month.  Now  that we have directed that Rs.  300  should  be

14

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 22  

fixed for the district judges, we command that the sumptuary allowance  fixed for the High Court Judges may  be  enhanced suitably.  These allowances shall be payable from  1.4.1992. We  would  like to add that this allowance is  intended  for utilisation  to  the full extent for  entertaining  judicial officers  in connection with preformance of duty  and  would not be considered as a perk for being included in the  hands of the recipient as his income. VI     Provision  of an official residence for  every  judicial officer should be made mandatory. A judicial officer to work in  a manner expected of him has to free himself from  undue obligations  of  others, particularly  owners  of  buildings within his jurisdiction who ordinarily may have  litigations before  him.  This is mostly the case in rural  areas  where outstation  judicial  courts are located. We  are  aware  of cases where a rural court is located in the building belong- ing to a lawyer or a client. Even the residential accom- 223 modation  of the judicial officer belongs to people of  that category. Such a situation often gives occasion to  personal embarrassment  to  the  judicial officer and it  has  to  be avoided.     Expenditure  on  residential accommodation in  a  family budget is not ordinarily to exceed 15 per cent of the month- ly  income,  otherwise it becomes difficult for  the  person concerned to make his two ends meet. A judicial officer  who is  not provided residential accommodation is obliged to  go in for rented accommodation. In view of the prevailing  rate of  rent, the smallest accommodation that can be  taken  may often  cost 75 per cent to 100 per cent of the monthly  sal- ary,  a situation which cannot be contenanced by any  logic. It  is  absolutely  necessary  that  appropriate  conditions should  be provided for the judicial officer and  he  should have  reasonable mental peace in order that he  may  perform his duties satisfactorily. Rendering justice is a  difficult job. It is actually a divine act. Unless the judicial  offi- cer  has a reasonable worry free mental condition, it  would be difficult to expect unsoiled justice from his hands.     Very often building projects are undertaken for  provid- ing  residential  accommodation to public officers  but  the requirement  of the judicial ofricer is not taken  into  ac- count  for  one reason or the other. Control  of  the  State purse is in the hands of the executive. As appropriate share of  construction  expenses  is not  being  provided  towards accommodation  of  judicial officers, they do not  have  any quota in the building projects. As a result of this over the years  at several places throughout the country  residential accommodation  for  judicial officers has turned out  to  be scanty. Many judicial officers dread postings in  Metropoli- tan towns as residential accommodation is not available  and the rental would be exorbitant in respect of private  accom- modation. The cost of living also becomes heavy.     We  take judicial notice of the fact that  the  Planning Commission of the Central Government is considering  accept- ance of the subordinate judiciary as a plan subject. Provid- ing adequate residential accommodation should be  considered as  a priority. Until adequate government  accommodation  is available,  it should be the obligation of the State at  the instance of the High Court to provide requisitioned accommo- dation for every judicial officer according to his  entitle- ment  and  recovery of not more than twelve and a  half  per cent  of salary of the officer towards rent should  be  made and  the  balance should be met by the State  Exchequer.  We would  emphasise  the need of provision of  a  separate  and

15

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 22  

exclusive office room as an indispensable component of every such  official residence and the accommodation  should  take into  account this feature. As a long term measure,  Govern- ment accommodation should be constructed to meet the 224 need of the judicial officers at their respective  stations. This  should  be  a matter for the  Planning  Commission  to review and the State Governments to cooperate and  undertake construction activity. The Governments of the States and the Union Territories would take some time to implement this pan of  the  direction. In case for some  reason,  the  Planning Commission  does  not  come forward to take  up  the  matter before January, 1992, the Chief Justice of every High  Court should  set  up a committee with him as Chairman  where  two senior  Judges of the Court and the Secretaries of  Finance, Law  and  Works  should be members and  annual  planning  of construction  of residences should be made.  We  accordingly fix  the outer limit of December 31,1992 when this  part  of the direction would become fully operative. VII     We shall now deal with the claim for transport. In  most of  the States the district judge has been provided a  motor car and in some of the States the chief judicial  magistrate is also provided with such transport, be it a car or a jeep. There  are  still some States like  Rajasthan,  Haryana  and Madhya  Pradesh where provision of a car for every  district judge  has not yet been made. We direct that every  district judge  should be provided with a car by March 31, 1992,  and it  shall be the obligation of the other States  where  such facility has not open provided to ensure the same within the time limit.     The chief judicial magistrate is a touring officer apart from  doing trial work as a magistrate. Mandate of the  Code of  Criminal Procedure requires him to undertake some  tout- ing.  The quality of criminal justice  administration  would very  much  depend upon the mobility of the  chief  judicial magistrate.  We, therefore, direct that in such  States  and Union  Territories where provision of independent  transport for  the  chief judicial magistrate has not been  made,  the same  should be done by September 30, 1992. We are.  further of  the view that in stations with more than  four  judicial officers  a  common  transport should be  provided  for  the purpose  of taking them from the residence to the court  and back  and  meeting their other official  purposes  and  such vehicle should be placed under the control of the seniormost officer  in  the pool. The arrangement should  be  that  for every  five officers, there should be a  vehicle.  Provision for  this  aspect  should be made by March  31,  1993.  This direction  has become necessary as judicial officers  should not be forced to travel along with litigants and lawyers. In many  sensitive  cases, records are carried by  them.  Often judgments  to be pronounced are also taken by them. In  some disturbed  areas, instances of harassment to judicial  offi- cers taking advantage of their using       225 common  transport have come to light. We direct  that  every State and Union Territory would file a compliance report  in the Registry of this Court in respect of these three aspects within one month from the expiry of the outer limit indicat- ed for each of them.     There  are several outlying courts where the  number  of officers  would not be more than five. We do not  intend  to provide any independent transport for them but such officers who  ask for loan for purchase of a two  wheeler  automobile should  immediately be provided the same. Appropriate  funds

16

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 22  

should be made available for such purpose. A pool car should have  60 litres of petrol per month and a  judicial  officer owing a scooter would be entitled to an allowance of Rs. 200 per month.     We  are alive to the fact that our directions involve  a burden on the State Exchequer. Perhaps some justification as to  why  these expenses should not be grudged  must  now  be indicated.  Professor Pannick in his book entitled  "Judges" has observed:               "Judges do not have an easy job. They  repeat-               edly  do  what the rest of us seek  to  avoid;               make decisions". He further added:               "Judges are mere mortals but they are asked to               perform a function that is utterly divine".     Professor  Harold  Laski once wrote  to  Justice  Oliver Holmes  that  ’he wished that people could be  persuaded  to realise  that  judges are human beings; it would be  a  real help to jurisprudence’.     The  Trial  Judge’  is the kingpin  in  the  hierachical system  of administration of Justice. He directly  comes  in contact  with the litigant during the proceedings in  Court. On  him lies the responsibility of building up of  the  case appropriately  and  on his understanding of the  matter  the cause of justice is first answered. The personality,  knowl- edge,  judicial restraint, capacity to maintain dignity  are the  additional  aspects which go into  making  the  court’s functioning successful. Krishna Iyer, J. described the scene very graphically thus:               "Law is a means to an end and justice is  that               end.  But  in actuality, Law and  Justice  are               distant  neighbours;  sometimes  even  strange               hostiles.  If  law shoots  down  justice,  the               people shoot down law and lawlessness  paraly-               ses development, dis-               226                     rupts  order and retards progress.  This               is  the current scene". It calls  for  serious               introspection.               The Law Commission in its 14th Report said:               "If the public is to give profound respect  to               the judges the judges should by their  conduct               try and observe it; not by word or deed should               they  give cause for the people that  they  do               not  deserve the pedestal on which  we  expect               the  public  to place them. It appears  to  us               that  not  only  for the  performance  of  his               duties  but outside the court as well a  Judge               has to maintain an aloofness amounting  almost               to self imposed isolation".               The  Commission quoted Sir  Winston  Churchill               who had said:               "A  form of life and conduct far  more  severe               and restricted than that of ordinary people is               required from judges and though unwritten  has               been most strictly observed. They are at  once               privileged   and  restricted;  they  have   to               present  a  continuous aspect of  dignity  and               conduct".     These  prescriptions for a Judicial Officer,  therefore, result  in a restricted life. Austerity is a quality  to  be practised  by every Judge--personally as also in his  public functioning.  This  necessarily gives rise  to  a  situation where the Judge must have patience, perseverance and  pains- taking  habits. In order that a Judge may be able to put  in

17

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 22  

these  aspects into his public functioning it is  absolutely necessary  that the Judge enjoys freedom from personal  wor- ries.  A reasonable salary, appropriate allowances and  man- ageable  living  conditions are, therefore, required  to  be provided.     For  quite  a  few years the conditions  of  service  of Judges of the superior Courts and those of the public  offi- cers  in  the Executive side had been put at  par  excepting such provisions as were contained in the Government of India Act,  1935 or under the Constitution. For the first time  it was  accepted that separate Conditions of Service should  be provided  and Conditions of Service Acts for the High  Court and  Supreme Court Judges were separately enacted  in  1954. Those  statutes and the Schedules therein even  now  contain provisions  to the effect that matters for which  provisions have not been made by the statutes are to continue to be the same  as provided for the officers in the Executive wing  as named.  In a democratic polity the role of the judiciary  is indispensable. The efficient functioning of the Rule of  Law under  the aegis of which our democratic society can  thrive requires an efficient, strong and enlightened judiciary. And to  have  it that way the Nation has to pay  to  the  price. There was a time when a 227 Judge  enjoyed a high status in Society. Very often  a  suc- cessful  Member of the Bar earning a high income  favourably responded  to the invitation of the Chief Justice to  accept Judgeship.  Thai no more is the position. The sense of  pro- fessional  obligation  has died down for reasons  more  than one;  but  perhaps the most eloquent one is loss  of  social status of the judge. The effect of this position in  respect of  the higher judiciary has its impact on  the  subordinate judiciary  too. Half a century back a Judicial officer  even of  the lowest category enjoyed great social status. He  was looked upon with a sense of reverence. He led a life in tune with  the recommendations of the Law Commission in its  14th Report.  He had the training of limiting his wants and  man- aged  to live a contented life by making his two  ends  meet with  limited resources of small salary. That philosophy  of life  has  vanished  or is fast vanishing.  A  great  social change  has  over  taken today’s society.  Life  has  become competitive;  demands of life have increased; and  aptitudes have  changed.  Therefore, today a judicial  officer  always looks  at  life  in a comparative  way  with  administrative officers  of  his age. Professional income at  the  Bar  has tremendoulsy  swelled up. Very often counsel’s fee  per  day equals to the salary of a judicial officer for a full  month or even a longer period. This great disparity affects  peace and equilibrium in the judicial operation. As early as 1958 the Law Commission said:               "As we shall point out, later the problem  has               since  grown  in dimension  because  there  is               unmistakable  testimony that the standards  of               the  judicial officers recruited from the  Bar               and  other  sources have during  recent  years               fallen  in  a substantial degree  for  various               reasons. This has been almost the unique  view               expressed  by the witnesses .before us. It  is               thus  obvious  that  no scheme  of  review  of               judicial  administration will be effective  or               worthwhile unless the basic problem of provid-               ing  a trained and capable judicial  personnel               is satisfactorily solved"     This  was adequate and timely notice to  the  Government and its people. Instead of attending to the problem then, 33

18

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 22  

long  years have been allowed to roll by and what  was  then said as a growing dimension has grown to devalue the system. Its resurrection has, therefore, become more costly.     It is perhaps useful to recall here the prophetic  warn- ing sounded by Robert Ingersoll:               "A  government  founded  on  anything   except               liberty  and  justice cannot  stand.  All  the               wrecks  on either side of the stream of  time,               all  the wrecks of the great cities,  and  all               the nations that               228               have  passed away---all are a warning that  no               nation founded upon injustice can stand.  From               the  sand  enshrouded Egypt, from  the  marble               wilderness of Athens, and from every fallen or               crumbling stone of the once mighty Rome, comes               a  wail  as it were, the cry  that  no  nation               founded on injustice can permanently stand".     Society,  therefore, must understand the problem.  Solu- tion  to  the problem would depend upon realisation  of  the fact that the more capable people at the Bar are not willing to accept offers of judicial appointments. The plea that the other wings, in the States would demand inprovement in their scales  of  pay is not a relevant feature at  all  when  the problem  is viewed from this angle. We hope and  trust  that society would generate the appropriate understanding of  the matter  and  no Government would come forward  to  take  the stand  that  if  the pay scales and perks  of  the  Judicial officers are improved similar demands would come from  other wings of Government.     Even  in the existing system there are some posts  which carry special pay that is on account of the fact that  there is  more of basic equipment demanded and the nature of  work is different and judicial service satisfies both and, there- fore, Government can always prescribe a higher pay scale for Judicial Officers.     In 1986 there was a Conference of the Chief Justices  of the  High Courts, Chief Ministers and the Law  Ministers  of the States called by the then learned Chief Justice of India and the Ministry of Law and Justice.     The then Chief Justice of India and the Law Minister  of the  Central Government tried their best to make  the  State Governments  and the Union Territories understand the  basic problem.  While  some improvements came as a result  of  the Conference for the higher judiciary, the claim of the subor- dinate judiciary remained unattended.     We would like to point out that dispensation of  justice is  an inevitable feature in any civilised society.  Mainte- nance of law and order require the presence of an  efficient system  of  administration of criminal  justice.  Under  the Civil  Code, Court fee is realised under the Court Fee  Act. For  some  time demand to abolish it has been made  but  the States  have abandoned the idea on account of the demand  by the States of compensation from the Centre in case of aboli- tion  of Court fee. Court fee is not a tax and is a  fee  as has  been’  held by a Constitution Bench of  this  Court  in Secretary, Government of Madras, Home Department and another v.  Zenith  Lamps and Electrical Ltd., AIR 1973 SC  724.  In Paragraph 29 of this       229 Judgment Sikri, CJ speaking for this Court pointed out:               "It  seems to us that the separate mention  of               ’fees taken in Court’ in the Entries  referred               to  above has no other significance than  that               they logically come under Entries dealing with

19

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 22  

             administration  of  Justice  and  courts.  The               draftsman has followed the scheme designed  in               the Court Fees Act, 1870 or dealing with  fees               taken  in  court at one place. If it  was  the               intention  to  distinguish them from  fees  in               List II Entry 66, surely some indication would               have  been given by the language employed.  If               these words had not been separately  mentioned               in List I, Entry 77 and List II  ...........               It seems plain that ’fees taken in court’  are               not taxes, for if it were so, the word ’taxes’               would have been used or some other  indication               given. It seems to us that this conclusion  is               strengthened  by  two  considerations.  First,               taxes  that  can be levied by  the  Union  are               mentioned  in List I from Entry 82;  mentioned               in  List  II taxes that can be  imposed  start               from  Entry 45. Secondly, the very use of  the               words ’not including fees taken in any  court’               in  Entry  95 List 1, and Entry  66  List  II,               shows  that they would otherwise  have  fallen               within  these Entries. It follows  that  ’fees               taken in court’ cannot be equated to  "Taxes".               If this is so, is there any essential  differ-               ence  between  fees taken in court  and  other               fees  ?  We are unable to appreciate  why  the               word ’fees, bears a different meaning in Entry               77, List I and Entry 96 List I or Entry 3 List               II  and Entry 66 List II. All  these  relevant               cases on the nature of ’fees’ were reviewed in               India Mica and Micanite Industries Ltd. v. The               State of Bihar. AIR 1971 SC 1182 at page 1186,               by Hegde J. and he observed:               "From  the above discussion, it is clear  that               before  any  levy can be upheld as a  fee,  it               must  be  shown that the levy  has  reasonable               co-relationship with the services rendered  by               the Government. In other words, the levy  must               be  proved to be a quid pro quo for the  serv-               ices rendered. But in these matters it will be               impossible  to have an exact  co-relationship.               The  correlationship  expected  is  one  of  a               general  character and not as of  arithmetical               exactitude".     It  is  not  our intention to raise a  dispute  on  this aspect.  We adverted to these authorities and the  views  of this  Court to bring support for the view that what is  col- lected as Court fee at least be spent on the  administration of Justice instead of being utilised as a source of  general revenue 230 of  the  States. Undobutedly the income from court  fees  is more than the expenditure on the administration of  Justice. This is conspicuously noticeable from the figures  available in the publication in the Ministry of Law and Justice.     What we have said above should be adequate justification for  making provision with a view to making  judicial  func- tioning viable.     We would like to recall a part of the funeral oration on Mr.  Justice Story delivered some 150 years back  by  Daniel Webster:-               "Justice, Sir, is the greatest interest of man               on  earth.  It  is the  ligament  which  holds               civilised beings and civilised nations togeth-               er. Wherever her temple stands, and so long as

20

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 22  

             it is duly honoured, there is a foundation for               social  security,  general happiness  and  the               improvement  and  progress of  our  race.  And               whoever  labours on this edifice with  useful-               ness  and  distinction.  whoever  clears   its               foundations,  strengthens its pillars,  adorns               its entaplateures, or contributes to raise its               august  dome still higher in the  skies,  con-               nects himself in name and frame and  character               with  that which is and must be as durable  as               the frame of human society".     To those who control the purse what Webster said  should provide the direction. VIII     One  of the claims advanced before us was for  provision of inservice training for judicial officers. This we consid- er  as  a  must. In fact, the Law Commision in  one  of  its recent reports has advised that inservice institutes  should be  immediately set up. About a year back the Union  Govern- ment  had proposed the setting up of an All India  Inservice Institute  but nothing more has been done about it. In  some of  the States like Uttar Pardesh and Andhra  Pradesh,  such inservice institutes are functioning. We are of the view mat in  service institutes are indispensable for the  upkeep  of the  efficiency of judicial service. We direct that  an  All India institute of Inservice Training for higher officers of the  judiciary  including the district judges  and  a  State level  institute  for training of the other member,  of  the subordinate  judiciary within each of the States  and  Union Territories or one common institute for more than one  State or Union Territory should be set up within one year from now and  at any rate nor later than December 31, 1992. This  has to be orgainised by respective High Courts. 231     Before  we part, we must indicate with all the  emphasis at  our  command that the system has to be saved  as  for  a civilised  society an enlightened independent  judiciary  is totally  indispensable.  The High Court  must  take  greater interest in the proper functioning of the subordinate  judi- ciary.  Inspection should not be a matter of  casual  atten- tion. The Constitution has vested the control of the  subor- dinate  judiciary under Article 235 in the High Court  as  a whole  and not its Chief Justice alone. Every Judge  should, therefore,  take adequate interest in the institution  which is placed under the control of the High Court. We may  point out that that in what Lord Aktins said in Devi Prasad Sharma and  others v. The King Emperor, 70 IA 216. And it has  been approved by a Constitution Bench in Baradakanta Misra v. The Registrar  of  Orissa High Court and Another, [1974]  2  SCR 282. It should be remembered by all Judges of the High Coart viz.,  that  the administrative control of  the  subordinate courts of the states vest nor in the Chief Justice alone but in the Court over which the Chief Justice presides. Surger, CJ of the American Supreme Court once said:               "A sense of confidence in ,he Courts is essen-               tial to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty               for  a free people and it is for the  subordi-               nate  Judiciary  by its action  and  the  High               Court  by  its appropriate control  to  ensure               it".               It  is useful to remember what President  Lin-               coln often said:               "If  you once forfeit the confidence  of  your               fellow  citizens  you can never  regain  their

21

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 22  

             respect and esteem".     It  is time we mention about society’s expectation  from the  Judicial Officers. A judge ought to be wise  enough  to know that he is fallible and, therefore, even ready to learn and be courageous enough to acknowledge his errors     The  conduct of every judicial officer should  be  above reproach.  He should be conscientious,  studious,  thorough, courteous, ’patient, punctual, just, impartial, fearless  of public clamor, regardless of public praise, and  indifferent to  private,  political or partisan  influences;  he  should administer  justice  according  to law, and  deal  with  his appointment  as  a public trust; he should not  allow  other affairs  or  his  private interests to  interfere  with  the prompt  and proper performance of his judicial  duties,  nor should he administer the office for the purpose of advancing his personal ambitions or increasing his popularity. 232     We  would  like to part with the matter by  recalling  a statement of Edmund Burke:               "All  persons  possessing a portion  of  power               ought  to  be strongly and  awfully  impressed               with an idea that they act in trust, and  that               they are to account for their conduct in  that               trust  to  the one great  Master,  Author  and               Founder of Society".                   We  would now briefly indicate the  direc-               tions we have given in the judgment:                 (i) An All India Judicial Service should  be               set  up  and the Union of  India  should  take               appropriate steps in this regard.                 (ii)  Steps should be taken to  bring  about               uniformity  in  designation officers  both  in               civil and the criminal side by 31.3.1993.                 (iii) Retirement age of judicial officers be               raised  to 60 years and appropriate steps  are               to be taken by 31.12. 1992.                 (iv) As and when the Pay Commissions/Commit-               tees are set up in the States and Union Terri-               tories; the question of appropriate pay scales               of judicial officers be specifically  referred               and considered.                 (v)  A working library at the  residence  of               every  judicial officer has to be provided  by               30.6.1992.  Provision for sumptuary  allowance               as stated has to be made.                 (vi)  Residential  accommodation  to   every               judicial officer has to be provided and  until               State  accommodation is available,  Government               should provide requisitioned accommodation for               them in the manner indicated by 31.12.1992. In               providing  residential  accommodation,  avail-               ability  of  an office room should be  kept  m               view.                 (vii)  Every District Judge and Chief  Judi-               cial  Magistrate should have a State  Vehicle,               Judicial  officers in sets of 5 should have  a               pool  vehicle and others would be entitled  to               suitable loans to acquire two wheeler  automo-               biles  within different time limits as  speci-               fied.                (viii)Inservice  Institute should be  set  up               within  one year at the Central and  State  or               Union Territory level.               V.P.R.                                Petition               disposed of.

22

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 22  

233