SPEECH OF P.WILSON MP ON THE BILL TO AMEND HC/SC JUDGES (SALARIES AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) ACTS 1954/1958 Thank you, Chairman Sir. 1. This Bill seeks to amend Section 17 B of the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act of 1954 and

SPEECH OF P.WILSON MP ON THE BILL TO AMEND HC/SC JUDGES (SALARIES AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) ACTS 1954/1958

Thank you, Chairman Sir.
1. This Bill seeks to amend Section 17 B of the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act of 1954 and section 16 B of the Supreme Court judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act 1958 respectively by introducing Explanation to the Section 17B and Section 16 B of the above acts.. The stated objective is to bring clarity on when Supreme Court and High Court judges are entitled to additional quantum of pension. The Gauhati High Court in a judgment had said that pension should be calculated from the first day of the beginning of the 80th year of the retired Judge (ie after completing 79 years)while the present Bill clarifies that the revision is reckoned from the first day of the month in which the Pensioner or family pensioner completes the age of 80 years. This is the clarification the Bill seeks to make. Though the Bill effectively seeks to remove the basis of the judgement, however the Bill gives the correct interpretation of the statutory provision that a pensioner would be entitled to additional pension only when the pensioner completes the age of 80 years and not otherwise. I therefore support this Bill.
2. Sir, since we are discussing about the conditions of service of Judges, I being a part of the judicial system as a senior advocate, feel it is appropriate to place certain facts for thoughtful consideration by this August House and the Hon’ble Law minister and thus seek indulgence of you to do so.
3. There is no doubt that we must offer good monetary compensation to our Judges in High Court and Supreme Court by way of salary. The hard work put in by them during the years on the Bench is extraordinary. People outside the system sometimes do not see the strain – both physical and mental on the Judges of this country. They sacrifice everything – professionally, personally to uphold the Constitution and the laws.
4. Sir I think its high time we comprehensively revise the salaries of Judges. A good financial package is vital to attract the top talent from the Bar to take up Judgeship. Presently, the monthly salary of a Judge of the Supreme Court is less than a single day fee of a leading senior advocate appearing before the supreme Court. That has to change.
5. Another issue relating to service conditions is increasing the age of retirement of High Court Judges to 65 years from 62 years and from 65 years to 70 years for supreme court judges. 62 years and 65 years are too early for retirement. There are three reasons why we need to increase the age of judges. One is the large number of pending cases before the High Courts and Supreme Court. As per recent statistics, there are about 57 lakh cases pending before the various High Courts and 75,000 cases before the Supreme Court. The other reason is that judges who attain the age of 62 and 65 years are well experienced judges who would be well suited to tackle pendency. Their invaluable experience gained over years at the Bench cannot be substituted by fresh faces.. With improvement in technology and medicine, life expectancy has increased and people are more productive now in their 60’s than before. The third reason is that by retiring Judges at the age of 62 and 65 years, we are effectively cutting off their main source of income. Of course, some Judges go on to post-retirement jobs in Tribunals and others become arbitrators or even practice before the Supreme Court. But to a large section of Judges, their careers end at 62. That leaves them dependent on their pensions, and if we are honest, it is not a lot of money to sustain themselves and their families. If we look to other countries, the USA has a lifetime tenure for Judges of its Supreme Court and Federal Courts. In the UK, the age of retirement is presently 70, and there have been calls to increase it to 75. So, we should at once increase the age of retirement of Judges.
6. Sir, the vacancies across the High Courts is alarming. At present there are about 402 vacancies in High Courts out of total 1098 sanctioned posts. Recently, the Hon’ble Law Minister has stated that the delay is due to procedural reasons like IB verification etc. But even such legitimate processes cannot take months together. All constitutional authorities should act within a reasonable time frame including the Union Government. India has one of the lowest judge-to-population ratio at approximately 21 judges per million. Whereas, in developed countries like UK the ratio is 51 and the US has 107. Such a grave situation has a bearing on the justice delivery system and litigants ultimately suffer.
7. Sir, certain disturbing trends are noticed in the composition of the judges of the Supreme Court and High Court judges. For the past few years, we have been witnessing declining representation from all the sections of the society in the higher judiciary. There is a diversity deficit in our Courts and they are not indicative of the wonderfully diverse and pluralistic society of India.
8. Sir, appointments as Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts should be made considering representation from all sections of society including Scheduled Caste /Schedule Tribes/ Other Backward Class/ minorities and women. I am asking to keep representation in mind while selecting candidates. As per the report of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes of 2016, in the year 2011, out of 850 judges in High Courts there were only totally 24 judges belonging to SC and ST communities. 14 out of these High Courts did not have a single judge belonging to SCs/STs. Out of the 246 Supreme Court Judges, retired and sitting, there have only been 8 women judges . And out of the total of 1113 Judges across various High Courts and the Supreme Court in the year 2011, there were only 80 women judges amounting to just 7.9% of the total strength. Five High Courts had no women judges at all. This paints a stark picture and it is imperative to address this gender gap permanently. Not even a single Judge from the Schedule Tribes have been appointed as a Judge of Supreme Court till date. Where is equality in this nation ?
9. Sir, Judicial diversity is fundamental to the quality of judging. The statistics show that many weaker sections are poorly represented in the higher Judiciary. This may mean their rights are not being properly safeguarded. People of this country are afraid that a very narrow, homogeneous group of Judges belonging to certain social classes are not necessarily going to reflect the views and values of society as a whole, particularly on issues involving diverse, cultural and generational matters because they would require more perspectives, as the Judges would interpret and enforce law based on their own background
10. Sir significant over-representation of certain sections as judges calls into question the objectivity of the current system and its inability to recruit from different social groups and ensure social justice and social diversity. There is much to gain from having a judiciary that reflects society in all its diversity. The lack of inclusivity in the judiciary would widen the trust deficit over the higher judiciary and there is always a likelihood of affinity bias
11. I therefore appeal through this August House to the Hon’ble Law Minister to bring in suitable measures by way of constitutional amendments to ensure social Justice and diversity and representation for all classes in the appointment of judges of High Courts and Supreme Court. At this juncture I have to thank the present Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and the Hon’ble Collegium Judges of the Supreme Court and the Hon’ble Law Minister for upholding social justice and diversity in the recent appointment of 9 judges to the Supreme Court of which 3 are women judges, one from OBC community and one from SC community.
12. Sir, The Bench of the Supreme Court should also have adequate representation from all states/Union Territories, based on the sanctioned strength of the High Court of the States. This is key to upholding the principles of federalism in the judicial branch as well..
13. Sir, the other issue that I would like to address at this juncture is the establishment of permanent regional benches of the Supreme Court. This will increase the efficacy of the Supreme court. The framers of our Constitution considered the right to access to justice to be so sacrosanct that they enacted Article 32 – a direct access to the highest Court of the land to enforce fundamental rights. However, this recourse to Article 32 is now available only to (i) citizens who are geographically close to the Supreme Court and (ii) the financially privileged class to whom costs of litigation and travel does not matter. Considering the fact that the Supreme Court is located at New Delhi (which is not equidistant to all parts of the country) and is far away from many States, particularly the Southern, South Western & Eastern States, the citizens in these States are virtually deprived of their right to approach the Court not only due to distance but also due to the cost factor. Sir Access to justice is not preserve of the rich. Regional Benches would also mean that the Bench strength of the Supreme Court is increased, leading to more disposal of cases by the Apex Court and any step of establishment of courts in between High Court and Supreme Court is disastrous. The very purpose of access to Art 32 will be defeated.
14. The need for setting up regional benches has been felt over the last two decades in all quarters. The Standing Committees of Parliament have recommended the setting up of Regional Benches of the Supreme Court in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2008 and mist recently in the 107th Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice which was tabled before both the Houses on 16.3.2021.
15. The only other country with a billion plus population – China has 9 benches of its Supreme Court. Therefore, the time has come to amend the Constitution and establish permanent Regional Benches of the Supreme Court.
16. Therefore, these are in my humble opinion the pressing matters which require the attention of this August House with regard to the working of the Higher Judiciary.

Thank you Chairman sir.