States Have Money To Give Freebies But Can’t Pay Judges: Supreme Court – News18

Last Updated:January 07, 2025, 21:13 IST

The observation was made while the the bench was hearing petition filed in 2015 by the All India Judges Association.

The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that although states appear to have enough money to provide freebies to those who don’t work, but they claim financial crunch when it comes to paying district judges’ salaries and pensions.

A bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih remarked in response to a submission by Attorney General for India R Venkataramani that the government has to consider financial constraints when deciding the pay and retirement benefits of judicial officers, as reported by Bar and Bench.

“The state’s have all the money for the people who don’t do any work. When we talk abut financial constraints we also have to look at this. Come elections you declare ladli behana and other new schemes where you pay fixed amounts. In Delhi we have announcements now from some party or the other saying they will pay ₹2500 if they come to power,” Justice Gavai said.

The bench also referred to Maharashtra’s Laadli Behena Yojana and similar announcements made by parties in the upcoming Delhi assembly elections, while making the remark.

The observation was made while the the bench was hearing petition filed in 2015 by the All India Judges Association.

The Court has previously raised concerns that the pension rates payable to district judges in India are meagre, while also pointing out that such difficulties are not resolved even if district judges are later elevated to High Courts.

Earlier today, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Rajiv Kumar said that it is very difficult to define what a “freebie” is and the Election Commission’s “hands are tied” on the issue as it is subjudice.

While announcing the election schedule for the Delhi assembly polls, Kumar said it was “high time” that “accepted and legal answers” were found.

Asked about political parties announcing freebies during election campaigns, he said the matter was subjudice and referred to a court judgment that had held freebies were not “disallowed”.

“What is freebie for me may be an entitlement for someone else… It is very difficult to define what a freebie is,” Kumar said.