Judiciary shouldn't feel shy to seek salary hike

Before the 1990s, those working in the private sector hesitated walking into the owner’s or the boss’s chamber seeking a salary hike. As a way out, someone who had the boss’s or owner’s ear was approached to bring up the subject before the "person who mattered". With liberalisation came the multinational corporate houses. They hunted for talent. The talented professionals, knowing their worth, negotiated salaries and demanded a hike whenever they felt it was not commensurate with the going rate in the market. Since the 1990s, the income graphs of successful lawyers have been heading north. Conversely, judges have become ever so shy of discussing their salaries, for the CJI gets Rs 33,000 per month and the judges of the Supreme Court Rs 30,000 per month. The High Court chief justices get Rs 30,000, while HC judges a little less. For the first time, during the annual conference of Chief Justices of the HCs presided over by CJI K G Balakrishnan during April 17-18 in New Delhi, an agenda note was circulated for a discussion on salary hike for judges of the SC and HCs in the wake of the sixth pay commission recommendations. The note, rightly, pointed out that a retired SC or HC judge, when posted as chairperson of regulatory bodies like TRAI, is recommended by the commission to be paid a salary upto Rs 3 lakh per month. The note said, "The Chief Justice of India, judges of Supreme Court as well as chief justices and judges of the HCs are professionally qualified, highly experienced persons, who are experts in law and who have sacrificed lucrative practice at Bar to serve the country. They cannot be paid less than chairpersons of regulatory bodies whose orders are challenged before them every day." When the conference got over, a committee of three HC chief justices drafted the resolution giving an insight into the discussions and the agreements reached. Under the salary hike proposal, the committee noted "discussed". On the evening of April 18, there was a get-together of the CJs organised by a Bar Association. Attorney general Milon Banerjee, expressing his personal view and clarifying that it was not that of the government, said that judges should get much more salary than what they are getting at present. Justice Balakrishnan, probably belonging to the old school of professionals, was shy of discussing in public the need for a salary hike for judges and said the conference of CJs did not even discuss the issue, though the committee of three CJs mentioned that the issue was discussed. There cannot be two views that judges should get much higher salary, commensurate with their status and work, especially when retired Supreme Court judges get huge amounts presiding over arbitration proceedings. But once they are paid higher salary, there is bound to be a demand that they should not enjoy long vacations — nearly a month-and-a-half in summer and a fortnight in the winter. Corporate houses, which pay handsome salaries to their executives, give no such long breaks. In the US, the federal courts have listed 10 public holidays for 2008. Apart from the long summer and winter vacations, the Supreme Court of India has listed 15 public holidays apart from six-day breaks each for Holi, Dussehra and Diwali. It would be improper to compare the US federal courts to the Supreme Court, or for that matter any other court in India, as the judges in US do not have to hear on an average 70 cases a day. But, the comparison would be there between other sectors and judiciary, once the salary differences are bridged. However, this heavy workload is another factor in favour of the CJI to drive home, without feeling shy, the point to the government for a salary hike for judges. dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com
21 Apr 2008, 0232 hrs IST , Dhananjay Mahapatra , TNNTIMES OF INDIA