Report No. 14
81. Munsifs' starting pay too low.-
While dealing with the main causes of the decline in the standards of the subordinate judiciary, we pointed out, how an officer of the judicial branch of the State Civil Service is at a disadvantage in regard to his emoluments in comparison with a member of the executive branch. This is mainly due to the fact that generally an entrant to the judicial service starts at a higher age than his counter-part in the executive branch. Thus, in States where practice at the Bar is necessary for entry into the service, a young man can enter it at the earliest at the age of twenty-six or twenty-seven.
He has thus to make a substantial outlay in expenditure and spend some years in acquiring the necessary special qualifications for the judicial service. On the other hand, an entrant to executive service need not spend money or time in equipping himself. Entering the service immediately after graduation at the age of twenty-one, he has a start of five years over a judicial officer. These are very weighty reasons for fixing the initial salary of a recruit to the judicial service at a somewhat higher level than that of his counter-part in the executive service. But unfortunately this position is not always recognised.
We consider it is desirable and necessary that, when people are recruited somewhat later in life on account of their special qualifications, they ought to be started at a minimum salary higher than that paid to ordinary graduates recruited immediately after completion of their university courses. We have already noticed the starting pay of judicial officers in the several States. In our opinion, the starting salary of munsifs in all the States, with the exception of Uttar Pradesh, falls far below of what, in our opinion, should be the minimum adequate starting salary.
82. Biennial increments not desirable.-
We noticed with some surprise that the scales of pay of munsifs and subordinate judges in Andhra Pradesh and Madras and of subordinate Judges in Assam provide for biennial increments. The scheme of biennial increments is not so innocuous as it may appear. Although the biennial increments are double the normal annual increments, yet it does cause some hardship to the officers concerned without any substantial benefit to the State. This will be clear from the comparative statement below which shows the amount payable by way of salary to a judicial officer during the first eight years of his service under the two different scales, one providing for annual increments and the other for biennial increments:
No. of years |
Total salary per year |
Total salary per year |
(300-50/2-700) biennial |
(300-25-700) |
|
1 |
3600 |
3600 |
2 |
3600 |
3900 |
3 |
4200 |
4200 |
4 |
4200 |
4500 |
5 |
4800 |
4800 |
6 |
4800 |
5100 |
7 |
5400 |
5400 |
8 |
5400 |
5700 |
36000 |
37200 |
|
Difference is Rs. 1200 |
Thus, during eight years of the service of a judicial officer, the State Government gains Rs. 1200 i.e., Rs. 150 per year. But for a judicial officer the additional three hundred rupees every alternate year means a great deal. The principal object of giving increments to a public servant is to enable him to meet his increasing responsibilities and expenditure as he grows in age. The principle of biennial increments does not seem to take into account psychological factors, so important in the maintenance of the efficiency of the services. Annual increments have become almost a normal feature of the service under the State. We, therefore, recommend that the scales of pay for judicial officers should invariably provide for annual and not biennial increments.
83. Suggested pay scale for munsifs.-
The great responsibility of the work which a judicial officer is called upon to discharge needs no emphasis. In some States, as has been pointed out, the munsif's jurisdiction extends up to Rs. 10,000 and as a judicial magistrate of the first class, the same officer is competent to inflict a sentence of imprisonment up to two years. Judicial integrity is of the greatest importance and to expect persons discharging responsible functions to live on low salaries not commensurate with their office and responsibility is unrealistic and ignores present day living conditions.
Elsewhere, we have also dealt with the difficulties which judicial officers, as a class, have to face in the matter of securing residential accommodation and how, in some parts of the country, a very high percentage of their salary has to be spent towards house rent alone. Considering these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the scales of pay should be substantially higher than it is at present in order to enable an officer to maintain a proper standard of living and avoid obligations which may be embarrassing to him in the discharge of his duties. We, therefore, recommend that the pay scale of a civil judge, (junior division] should be fixed at Rs. 350-25-400-(confirmation)-30-520-EB-30-700. The scale is spread over thirteen years with an efficiency bar after the seventh year of the service.
84. Subordinate Judges.-
There is an equally striking disparity in the scales of pay of subordinate judges. In Bombay, they have a pay scale of Rs. 695-45-875; in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 750-25-850; in Mysore Rs. 500-25-600; in Madras and Andhra Pradesh Rs. 500-50/2-700; in Assam Rs. 500-50/2-800 and in Bihar they have a long pay scale of Rs. 350-15-380-30-770-40-850. In some States like Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan, subordinate judges and munsifs are borne on the same scale of pay which ranges between Rs. 300 to Rs. 850 in Uttar Pradesh and Rs. 250 to Rs. 750 in Rajasthan. In the Punjab, there is no distinction between munsifs and subordinate judges; there is only one cadre comprising of subordinate judges who are classified as subordinate Judges Class I to Class IV, according to the extent of their pecuniary jurisdiction.
They are all borne on pay scale of Rs. 300- 30-510-EB-30-600-40-720-EB-40-800-50-850. It will be noticed that in a large number of States like Andhra Pradesh, Madras, Bihar, Assam and Orissa, there is considerable overlapping in the pay scales of munsifs and subordinate judges. Thus, in Madras and Andhra Pradesh munsifs are in the scale of Rs. 300-700 and subordinate judges in the scale of Rs. 500-700. In Bihar, the munsifs scale is Rs. 220-750 and the subordinate judge's scale is Rs. 350-850. Similarly, in Assam munsifs are in the pay scale of Rs. 250-750 and subordinate judges are in the scale of Rs. 500-800.
Likewise, in Orissa, munsifs are in the scale of Rs. 200-750 and subordinate judges are in the scale of Rs. 300-850. The result of this overlapping is that, if a munsif is promoted as a subordinate judge, he gets very little financial advantage, because all that is done is to fix his pay in the new scale above the actual salary that he was getting as a munsif. We may illustrate the position. A munsif in Bihar who after ten years of service gets Rs. 445 per month, on promotion as a subordinate judge would get only Rs. 470 in the scale of subordinate judge.
The only other advantage that he would derive is that he will go into a scale, the maximum of which is slightly higher than, that of a munsif. In States where the pay scales of munsifs and subordinate judges are the same, the promotion, of a munsif would merely amount to a change in designation without any change in remuneration. Promotions such as these are merely nominal and can hardly instil in the officer the increased sense of responsibility which is necessary on elevation to a higher post.
A subordinate judge occupied a very important position in the judicial hierarchy. His pecuniary jurisdiction is unlimited and he has to try complicated suits, often of large value. Appeals against his decisions are generally heard by the High Court. In many places, a senior subordinate judge also hears civil appeals transferred to him by the district judge. They are also invested with powers of assistant sessions judges and in that capacity they try sessions cases and also hear appeals against convictions by second and third class magistrates. Elsewhere, we have also recommended that they should be invested with powers to try cases under the Indian Succession Act, Land Acquisition Act and other special enactments.
85. Pay scales of subordinate judges to be different from that of munsifs.-
Having regard to the important nature of their work, we think it unreasonable and inadvisable to put subordinate judges on the same scale of pay as munsifs. The difference in the duties entrusted to them is so substantial, that to put them on the same scale of pay as munsifs, is to ignore completely their special role in the administration of justice. The higher degree of their responsibility requires a separation of the scales of pay of subordinate judges and munsifs so that when a munsif is promoted as a subordinate judge, it should be a promotion for him, in status as well as in remuneration.
Unless promotions are accompanied by manifest advantages, they are likely to be treated merely as a matter of routine and can scarcely stimulate an officer to enter upon his new work with greater vigour and enthusiasm. A real promotion would have the unmistakable advantage of affording satisfaction to the individual officers and enhancing their morale. We, therefore, recommend that a subordinate judge should have an altogether distinct scale of pay which should not overlap the munsif's scale of pay.
86. Suggested pay scale.-
The existing pay scales of subordinate judges and officers of corresponding rank are not commensurate with the nature and magnitude of the work they are expected to perform. We feel that they ought to be placed in a scale not below what is usually given to a senior Class I officer, that is, Rs. 600-40-1000-1000-50-1100, This pay scale is however spread over 14 years and we do not think it is desirable to put a subordinate judge who is likely to be a senior man of advanced years on such a long time scale. This scale should therefore be modified to Rs. 700-50-1000 with a length of six years. The scale of pay begins at the point where the munsif's scale ends. We, therefore, recommend the above mentioned scale for civil judges (senior division) and the officers equivalent to that rank.
87. District judges (Pay Scales to correspond with those of collectors).-
In a large number of States, the pay scales of the district judges have been equated with the senior scale in the Indian Administrative Service viz., Rs. 800-50-100060-1300-50-1800. In some States like Andhra Pradesh and Madras they start on Rs, 1000. In Mysore, however, the pay scale of a district judge is Rs. 900-50-1300, and in Assam Rs. 850-50-1500. In. Kerala, their scale of pay is Rs. 850-1300. These pay scales are in our view too low.
It has to be remembered that even in States like Assam and Mysore the Indian Administrative Service officers are paid at higher scales. The district judge, who is the head of the district judiciary, is paid a remuneration substantially less than that paid to the head of the district executive, the collector. We recommend that in these States, the pay scale should be raised so as to correspond to the Indian Administrative Service scales of pay, as has been done in the rest of India.
88. Starting pay of District Judges (To be revised) (For promoted officers).-
We may, however, point out a practical difficulty which the members of the subordinate judiciary have to face. Even in States where the scales of pay of the district judges are on par with those of the Indian Administrative Service, in point of fact very few district judges ever reach the maximum of the scale i.e. Rs. 1800. District Judges, we found, generally retire on a pay ranging between Rs. 1000 and Rs. 1300. This arises from the fact that unlike the other services, promotions in the judicial service are extremely slow and are obtained after a long period of service. Various factors contribute to the delayed promotions in the judicial service.
Firstly, the proportion of higher posts to the subordinate posts is very small; secondly, unlike the executive services in which there has been increasing expansion on account of the States' growing welfare activities, there has not been much expansion in the judicial service; thirdly, unlike the other services, there is direct recruitment from the Bar to the extent of 25 to 50 per cent. to the higher judicial service. With the field of promotion restricted by these causes in a large number of the States, a judicial officer is not promoted to be a district judge, until he has been in service from fifteen to twenty years or even longer.
While it is possible for an Indian Administrative Service officer to reach the maximum of his scale viz., Rs. 1800, within a period of 25 years' service, a District Judge cannot ordinarily reach the maximum of his scale on account of his promotion to be a district judge at a later stage in his service. An Indian Administrative Service officer is generally recruited between 21 and 24 years of age. He gets into the senior scale by the sixth year of service, he can reach the maximum of his scale at the age of about forty-nine and can earn his maximum pay for a period of six years.
Generally, a person does not however enter the judicial service till he is at least twenty-six or twenty-seven years of age. He can therefore have a maximum span of twenty-eight years of service before he reaches the age of superannuation. Within this comparatively short span of service, promotions take an extraordinarily long time for the reasons mentioned earlier. If a judicial officer is promoted to be a district judge at the age of 45 years and if he starts on a salary of Rs. 800 he will never be able to reach the maximum of Rs. 1800 and on his retirement at fifty-five he will be drawing a salary of Rs. 1350 only.
Even if the age of retirement is raised to 58 as recommended by us elsewhere he will, perhaps, be drawing Rs. 1500 at the age of retirement. The improvement in the scale of salary of district judges has, therefore, been wholly illusory. There is not much meaning in having a scale in which people cannot ordinarily reach the maximum. It is obvious that no member of the subordinate judiciary can be appointed a district judge at an age which would ensure a service of twenty years as a District Judge so that he may reach the maximum of his pay i.e. Rs. 1,800. We, therefore, recommend that suitable adjustments be made in fixing the starting salary of officers promoted as District Judges.
In some States, the effect of late promotions is sought to be obviated by providing for a higher initial salary based on some advance increments proportioned to the length of service. Thus, in Orissa the initial pay of an officer promoted as district judge is fixed at the stage in the time scale of pay above the officer's pay in the lower rank plus increments at the rate of one increment for every three years of service subject to a minimum increase of Rs. 200 and a maximum increase of Rs. 300. Similar rules obtain in Bombay with the difference that the maximum increase in the initial pay above the minimum of the scale cannot exceed Rs. 200.
In order that a judicial officer should derive real benefit from his pay scale, he should on promotion, be made to start not at the minimum of the scale, but on that pay in the time scale which would correspond to his having reached that post at the end of a certain number of years of service in the lower ranks. This method of calculating the starting salary obtains in the all-India Services, where a person on entering the senior scale gets as his initial salary a higher pay than the minimum of the time scale corresponding to the length of his service.
We have devised the accompanying Table on the lines of the all-India Service scales of pay indicating the starting salary of the promotees from one grade of judicial officers to another grade. We may, however, emphasise that it shows the minimum that a judicial officer should get after a certain length of service. Thus, if a civil judge (junior division) is promoted to the senior division or if a civil judge (senior division) is prompted as district judge, before completing seven years of service he should still get the minimum of the scale of his new post.
Scales of Pay
Probable age |
Length of service in years |
Pay of Civil Judge (Junior) |
Pay of Civil Judge (Senior) |
Pay of District and Sessions Judge |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
28 |
1 |
350 |
||
29 |
2 |
375 |
||
30 |
3 |
(Confirmation) |
||
400 |
||||
31 |
4 |
430 |
||
32 |
5 |
460 |
||
33 |
6 |
490 |
||
34 |
7 |
E.B. 520 |
||
35 |
8 |
550 |
700 |
800 |
36 |
9 |
580 |
750 |
850 |
37 |
10 |
610 |
800 |
900 |
38 |
11 |
640 |
850 |
950 |
39 |
12 |
670 |
900 |
1000 |
40 |
13 |
700 |
950 |
1060 |
41 |
14 |
700 |
1000 |
1120 |
42 |
15 |
700 |
1000 |
1180 |
43 |
16 |
700 |
1000 |
1240 |
44 |
17 |
700 |
1000 |
1300 |
45 |
18 |
700 |
1000 |
1350 |
46 |
19 |
700 |
1000 |
1400 |
47 |
20 |
700 |
1000 |
1450 |
48 |
21 |
700 |
1000 |
1500 |
49 |
22 |
700 |
1000 |
1550 |
50 |
23 |
700 |
1000 |
1600 |
51 |
24 |
700 |
1000 |
1650 |
52 |
25 |
700 |
1000 |
1700 |
53 |
26 |
700 |
1000 |
1750 |
54 |
27 |
700 |
1009 |
1800 |
55 |
28 |
700 |
1000 |
1800 |
89. In the case of persons appointed to the Judicial Service Class I directly from the Bar, appropriate rules may empower the State Governments to fix the initial salary in each case at a suitable stage in the time scale, on the recommendation of the High Court. We are aware that this will mean some extra expenditure for the States. But considering the important part the officers of the higher judiciary play in the administration of justice and having regard to the responsibility placed on them, it is only fair that they should get the real benefit of the scale of pay already prescribed for them.
90. Additional district judges (Pay to be uniform with that of district judges).-
At this stage, we may point out that in a number of States, somewhat lower scales of pay have been prescribed for the additional district judges and the corresponding posts. The reason apparently is that the State Governments want to have their work done cheaply. Thus in Bombay, there are no less than four different scales for posts in the higher judicial service. While the district judges are in the Indian Administrative Service scale, assistant judges get the scale of Rs. 700-50-1000, the Chief judge of the small cause court and the Chief presidency magistrate are on the scale of 1,600-100-1800 and the presidency magistrates are on the scale of Rs. 1;000-30-1,300.
The judges of the city civil court are paid Rs. 2,000, and the Chief judge Rs. 2,500. In Madhya Pradesh, additional district judges are in the scale of Rs. 600-25-850, which is almost equivalent to that of subordinate judges in other States. In Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan, civil and sessions judge are in the scale of Rs. 600-50-800 and Rs. 500-30-800-50-900 respectively. These scales of pay overlap to a certain extent the pay scales of subordinate judges and munsifs. In Assam additional district judges get Rs. 800-50-1,150 and in Bihar Rs. 800-50-1,500.
The civil and sessions judges in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan, assistant judges in Bombay and additional district judges elsewhere do practically the same judicial work as a district judge, except that a district judge has administrative duties. There is, we think, no justification for putting them on a pay scale lower than that of district judges. We have already recommended that the State Judicial Service Class I, should have only one cadre consisting of district judges and additional district judges.
If they are to be borne on the same cadre, it is only appropriate that they should be put on the same scale of pay. There would appear to be no justification for maintaining a difference in the pay of officers doing substantially the same work. We, therefore, recommend the discontinuance of separate scales of pay for the additional district judges and the corresponding posts. There should be only one class of posts in Judicial Service Class I with a uniform scale of pay, that is, Rs. 800-50-1,000-60-1,300-50-1,800.
Back
