States Allocate Funds for Election Freebies, Not Judges’ Salaries: Supreme Court

“Aakhir Tak – In Shorts”

1. The Supreme Court criticized state governments for funding election freebies while citing financial difficulties in paying judges’ salaries.
2. Ahead of Delhi Assembly elections, the Court raised concerns about the allocation of funds for electoral promises versus judicial salaries.
3. The Maharashtra BJP’s ‘Ladki Bahin’ initiative and similar promises by Delhi’s AAP and Congress were highlighted in the Court’s observations.
4. AAP’s ‘Mukhya Mantri Mahila Samman Yojana’ promises monthly assistance of Rs 2,100 to women, while Delhi Congress offers Rs 2,500.
5. The court called for urgent steps to ensure judges’ financial needs are met, urging a revision of salary and pension policies.

“Aakhir Tak – In Depth”

Supreme Court’s Critique: States’ Freebie Schemes vs Judges’ Salaries

The Supreme Court made a sharp observation, stating that while state governments manage to gather funds for election-related freebie schemes, they often claim financial constraints when it comes to paying judges. The Court noted the disparity between funds allocated for political promises and the inadequate financial provisions for judicial officers’ salaries and pensions. The Court was hearing a petition filed by the All India Judges Association that raised concerns about the injustice being done to the judiciary regarding financial benefits.

Election Freebies: Political Promises vs Economic Viability

As the Delhi Assembly elections draw closer, the political landscape is rife with promises made through freebie schemes. Maharashtra’s ruling BJP-led Mahayuti announced the ‘Ladki Bahin’ program, offering cash incentives for women in Maharashtra, reflecting the tendency of political parties to capitalize on the pre-election phase by offering electoral freebies. Similarly, in Delhi, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) promised Rs 2,100 monthly assistance for women through the “Mukhya Mantri Mahila Samman Yojana” if they are voted back to power. The Delhi Congress, in turn, promised a similar scheme, with Rs 2,500 as monthly support for women in Delhi. This creates an intense political competition where freebies emerge as a tool for electoral gain.

The Disparity Between Freebies and Judges’ Needs

While political parties are vying for votes through cash handouts, the financial stability of the judiciary remains precarious. States argue that paying judges their rightful salaries and pensions would be too expensive. However, the Supreme Court has challenged this reasoning, highlighting that the judiciary’s demands are legitimate, especially in light of the widespread distribution of state funds for election purposes.

Urging Immediate Reforms for Judicial Benefits

In response, the Supreme Court urged that states and the central government immediately overhaul judicial compensation structures. This includes revising salary and pension benefits to ensure that judges are adequately remunerated for their important work. It is evident that failure to address these issues not only undermines the judicial system’s integrity but also negatively impacts the public trust in justice delivery mechanisms. Therefore, reforming the payment structures for judges becomes crucial to preserve the stability of India’s judicial system.

“Aakhir Tak – Key Takeaways to Remember”

1. The Supreme Court expressed concern over the financial priorities of state governments, highlighting the contrast between funds for election freebies and the meager allocation for judges’ salaries.
2. Political parties, especially AAP and Congress in Delhi, have promised cash benefits to women ahead of the elections.
3. The judiciary has long awaited financial reforms, with the Supreme Court calling for immediate action.
4. A balanced approach is needed, one that guarantees the judicial system is financially equipped to function impartially and efficiently.

Aakhir Tak Editor-in-Chief

See Full Bio