1989 (7) TMI 333 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Pay hike for Supreme Court employees.
2. Parity in pay scales with Delhi High Court employees.
3. Interim orders and their implications.
4. Role of Chief Justice of India and President under Article 146(2) of the Constitution.
5. Applicability of the doctrine of 'equal pay for equal work'.
6. Judicial review of subordinate legislation.

Summary:

1. Pay hike for Supreme Court employees:
The Supreme Court employees filed Writ Petitions and Civil Miscellaneous Petitions for a pay hike inspired by a Five-Judge Committee report and Delhi High Court judgments. The Committee observed that the pay scales for Supreme Court staff had been borrowed from Central Government scales without considering the distinct nature of their work. The Committee recommended that the Chief Justice of India appoint a Committee of experts to devise a fair pay structure and refer the matter to the Fourth Pay Commission.

2. Parity in pay scales with Delhi High Court employees:
Several Writ Petitions filed by Delhi High Court employees led to revised pay scales, which were higher than those of Supreme Court employees. The Supreme Court employees sought parity, arguing that their duties were more onerous and they were entitled to equal pay for equal work. The Supreme Court passed interim orders granting the same pay scales and allowances as Delhi High Court employees to the Supreme Court staff.

3. Interim orders and their implications:
Interim orders were issued, directing that Supreme Court staff be paid the same pay scales and allowances as Delhi High Court employees. The Fourth Pay Commission's recommendations were not fully accepted by the Supreme Court Registry, leading to further interim orders maintaining higher pay scales for certain categories of employees.

4. Role of Chief Justice of India and President under Article 146(2) of the Constitution:
Article 146(2) empowers the Chief Justice of India to frame rules for the conditions of service of Supreme Court employees, subject to the President's approval for rules relating to salaries, allowances, leave, or pensions. The Chief Justice of India agreed to frame rules considering the Fourth Pay Commission's recommendations and submit them to the President for approval.

5. Applicability of the doctrine of 'equal pay for equal work':
The doctrine of 'equal pay for equal work' was discussed, with the Court noting that it is not an abstract doctrine but one of substance. If unequal pay results in discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution, the doctrine applies. The Delhi High Court judgments on pay scales, though possibly erroneous, had become final and binding, and the Supreme Court employees sought similar benefits.

6. Judicial review of subordinate legislation:
The Court emphasized that subordinate legislation, including rules made under Article 146(2), is subject to judicial review. The President's approval of such rules is a legislative act, but the Court can review it for arbitrariness, unreasonableness, or violation of constitutional principles. The Chief Justice of India must frame rules, and the President must consider them in good faith.

Conclusion:
The Chief Justice of India will frame rules for the salaries and allowances of Supreme Court employees, considering the Fourth Pay Commission's recommendations and other relevant materials. The interim orders will continue until the President approves the new rules. The Court directed maintaining the status quo regarding pay and allowances until the new rules are implemented.