In a landmark judgment delivered on Monday (May 19), the Supreme Court ruled that all retired High Court judges are entitled to receive full and equal pension benefits, irrespective of their date of retirement or the source of their appointment.

Upholding the principle of "one rank, one pension," the Court emphasized that once a person assumes the constitutional office of a High Court judge, there can be no distinction in pension entitlements.

The judgment was pronounced by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justice AG Masih, and Justice K Vinod Chandran. The bench laid down comprehensive directions aimed at eliminating disparities in pension among retired judges.

Key Directions Issued:

1. Full Pension to Retired Chief Justices:
   The Union of India shall pay ₹15 lakh per annum as full pension to retired Chief Justices of High Courts.

2. Full Pension to Other Retired Judges:
   Retired High Court judges, including those who served as Additional Judges, shall receive ₹13.50 lakh per annum as full pension.

3. No Discrimination Based on Source of Appointment:
   Whether a judge entered the High Court from the Bar or through the judicial service, they shall receive the same pension. The length of service or source of entry shall not be a factor.

4. Pension Despite Service Breaks:
   Judges who previously served in the district judiciary before their High Court appointment shall be paid full pension, even if there was a break between their two tenures.

5. Applicability Despite Entry Under New Pension Scheme:
   Judges who entered the judicial service after the implementation of the New Pension Scheme (NPS) are also entitled to full pension. The Court directed the respective State Governments to refund their NPS contributions along with dividends.

6. Family Pension for Deceased Judges:
   Widows or family members of High Court judges who died while in office shall receive family pension, regardless of whether the judge was permanent or additional.

Background of the Case:

The directions were issued in a suo motu case initiated to address disparities in retiral benefits for judges. The Court also considered a batch of writ petitions filed by former judges of various High Courts.

CJI Gavai, delivering the judgment, cited Article 221 of the Constitution and the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, affirming that uniformity in post-retirement benefits is integral to maintaining the dignity and independence of the judiciary.

“There cannot be any discrimination in pension based on how or when a judge entered the High Court. Once a person assumes the constitutional office of a High Court judge, the dignity of that office requires that all such judges be treated equally in retirement,” the CJI said.

The Court also clarified that differences in pension due to service gaps or due to entry under the New Pension Scheme are unconstitutional, as they violate Article 14 (Right to Equality) of the Constitution.

Case Title:

In Re: Refixation of Pension Considering Service Period in District Judiciary and High Court, SMW(C) No. 4/2024, and connected cases.