New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday summoned the chief and finance secretaries of several states and Union territories for non-compliance with the recommendations of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission on payment of arrears of pension and other retirement benefits to judicial officials.
Expressing strong displeasure over non-compliance with SNJPC recommendations, a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said: "We know how to achieve compliance now. If we simply say that the chief secretary will be present if the If the affidavit is not filed, it will not be filed.
"We will not send them to jail, but we will let them be here and then an affidavit will be filed. Let them be present personally now," the court said.
Although seven opportunities have been granted to states, it appears that full compliance has not been affected and several states are in default, he said.
"The chief and finance secretaries have to be present personally. Failure to comply will result in the court being forced to initiate contempt proceedings," he said.
As per the details that emerged during the hearing, the court found that Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Meghalaya, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu , Manipur, Odisha, Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, Sikkim and Tripura were non-compliant states and UTs.
The court directed the top two bureaucrats of these states to personally appear before it on August 23.
Detailed order is awaited.
The bench made it clear that it will not grant any more extensions.
He passed the orders after taking note of the submissions and perusing the note provided by advocate K Parmeswar, who is assisting the court as amicus curiae (a friend of the court).
Firstly, he also referred to the deduction of tax at source by states on compensations owed to current and retired judicial officers.
"Wherever there are exemptions under the Income Tax Act from deduction of TDS (tax deducted at source) on allowances, state governments shall ensure that no deductions are made. Where TDS is deducted incorrectly, the amount will be refunded to judicial officials," the bank said.
The court heard submissions on several states' compliance with the SNJPC.
He rejected the allegations of states such as West Bengal, which sought one more year of time, Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh and Kerala over the alleged delay in compliance with recommendations on payment of arrears and other benefits to judicial officials. .
The court directed the defaulting states to report compliance by August 20, besides asking their principal secretaries and finance secretaries to appear personally on August 23.
He rejected Assam's vehement submission that the order be deferred as the state was facing massive flood situations.
The court also did not allow Delhi to claim that it was awaiting approval from the Centre.
"We are not worried about that. You solve it with the Centre," the CJI said.
On January 10, the top court, in its verdict, said there was a need to maintain uniformity in the service conditions of judicial officers across the country.
It had ordered the constitution of a two-judge committee in each high court to oversee the implementation of orders on salaries, pensions and other retirement benefits for judicial officers, according to the SNJPC.
The apex court had said it was a matter of serious concern that even though officers of other services had benefited from a review of their conditions of service since January 1, 2016, similar issues relating to judicial officers are still awaiting resolution. final. decision eight years later.
He said the judges have retired from service and family pensioners of the deceased are also waiting for a resolution.
The SNJPC recommendations cover salary structure, pensions and family pensions and allowances, in addition to addressing the issue of establishing a permanent mechanism to determine the issues of conditions of service of the district judiciary.
Expressing strong displeasure over non-compliance with SNJPC recommendations, a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said: "We know how to achieve compliance now. If we simply say that the chief secretary will be present if the If the affidavit is not filed, it will not be filed.
"We will not send them to jail, but we will let them be here and then an affidavit will be filed. Let them be present personally now," the court said.
Although seven opportunities have been granted to states, it appears that full compliance has not been affected and several states are in default, he said.
"The chief and finance secretaries have to be present personally. Failure to comply will result in the court being forced to initiate contempt proceedings," he said.
As per the details that emerged during the hearing, the court found that Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Meghalaya, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu , Manipur, Odisha, Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, Sikkim and Tripura were non-compliant states and UTs.
The court directed the top two bureaucrats of these states to personally appear before it on August 23.
Detailed order is awaited.
The bench made it clear that it will not grant any more extensions.
He passed the orders after taking note of the submissions and perusing the note provided by advocate K Parmeswar, who is assisting the court as amicus curiae (a friend of the court).
Firstly, he also referred to the deduction of tax at source by states on compensations owed to current and retired judicial officers.
"Wherever there are exemptions under the Income Tax Act from deduction of TDS (tax deducted at source) on allowances, state governments shall ensure that no deductions are made. Where TDS is deducted incorrectly, the amount will be refunded to judicial officials," the bank said.
The court heard submissions on several states' compliance with the SNJPC.
He rejected the allegations of states such as West Bengal, which sought one more year of time, Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh and Kerala over the alleged delay in compliance with recommendations on payment of arrears and other benefits to judicial officials. .
The court directed the defaulting states to report compliance by August 20, besides asking their principal secretaries and finance secretaries to appear personally on August 23.
He rejected Assam's vehement submission that the order be deferred as the state was facing massive flood situations.
The court also did not allow Delhi to claim that it was awaiting approval from the Centre.
"We are not worried about that. You solve it with the Centre," the CJI said.
On January 10, the top court, in its verdict, said there was a need to maintain uniformity in the service conditions of judicial officers across the country.
It had ordered the constitution of a two-judge committee in each high court to oversee the implementation of orders on salaries, pensions and other retirement benefits for judicial officers, according to the SNJPC.
The apex court had said it was a matter of serious concern that even though officers of other services had benefited from a review of their conditions of service since January 1, 2016, similar issues relating to judicial officers are still awaiting resolution. final. decision eight years later.
He said the judges have retired from service and family pensioners of the deceased are also waiting for a resolution.
The SNJPC recommendations cover salary structure, pensions and family pensions and allowances, in addition to addressing the issue of establishing a permanent mechanism to determine the issues of conditions of service of the district judiciary.