Advs. with v. THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI ORS on 29 Oct 2025

Judgment

2. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. This is a writ petition filed by 13 Law Researchers (hereinafter, ‘LRs’) who were engaged by this Court, seeking the implementation of the direction Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:01.11.2025 17:18:57 W.P.(C) 7998/2025 issued by Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice dated 16th August, 2023, enhancing the monthly remuneration of the LRs with effect from 1st October,

The background of this case is that on 18th September, 2017 the remuneration of LRs was approved to be enhanced from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs.35,000/- and the same was implemented on 3rd January, 2018 by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (hereinafter, ‘GNCTD’).

4. The said remuneration was, further, increased to Rs. 50,000/- and the High Court had sought sanction for the same from the GNCTD on 24th August, 2018. The same remained pending for several years.

5. While the said increase in remuneration was pending approval from GNCTD, the remuneration was again increased to Rs. 65,000/- with effect from 1st August, 2019 which was finally sanctioned on 1st November, 2021 and a notification revising the said remuneration of LRs in the official engagement scheme was issued on 16th February, 2022.

6. Thereafter, the Committee for appointment of Special MMs, Oath Commissioners, Law Researchers, Law Interns, etc., of this Court had, in its meeting dated 16th August, 2023 considered various factors and had approved an increase in the remuneration of LRs from Rs.65,000/- to Rs. 80,000/-, with effect from 1st October, 2022. This was communicated to the Delhi Government by the High Court after the approval of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice on 1st September, 2023.

7. The same was pending before the Delhi Government, but since there was substantial delay in the decision to sanction the increase in remuneration, the present writ petition was filed by certain LRs.

8. In this petition, notice was issued on 8th July, 2025 and the GNCTD Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:01.11.2025 17:18:57 W.P.(C) 7998/2025 Delhi was impleaded, both through the Law Secretary and through Finance Secretary as Respondent Nos. 1(A) and 1(B). Affidavits were also directed to be filed by the GNCTD, as also by the Union of India.

9. Thereafter, on 9th September, 2025, a decision dated 3rd September, 2025 taken by the Delhi Government was also placed on record as per which, the GNCTD had approved the decision for enhancement of monthly remuneration of LRs engaged in the High Court of Delhi from Rs. 65,000/- to Rs. 80,000/-, with effect from 2nd September, 2025. After taking this decision of the GNCTD on record, this Court, on 9th September, 2025, observed as under: today, Accordingly, the decision dated 3rd “8. September 2025 of the Hon’ble Council of Ministers, GNCTD has been placed on record, wherein the issue regarding the engagement of Law Researchers in the Delhi High Court and enhancement of their remuneration has been approved in the following terms: Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:01.11.2025 17:18:57 W.P.(C) 7998/2025

9. The Court has taken note of the said decision of the Hon’ble Council of Ministers, GNCTD which provides for enhancement of the monthly remuneration of Law Researchers engaged in Delhi High Court from Rs. 65,000/- to Rs. 80,000/- with effect from 2nd September, 2025. 10. However, it is seen from the documents on record that the Committee of this Court, as also the Hon’ble Chief Justice, in the meeting dated 16th August, 2023, had approved the revision of remuneration of Law Researchers from Rs. 65,000/- to Rs. 80,000/- w.e.f. 1st October 2022. While the said enhancement has now been approved by the Hon’ble Council of Ministers, GNCTD, the date from when the approval has been granted is 2nd September 2025 i.e., the date when the Cabinet of Ministers took the decision. On the previous occasion when similar 11. enhancement of remuneration was undertaken, the same was in terms of the recommendations made by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court as is evident from the order dated 6th December 2023 passed in W.P.(C) 5099/2023 which reads as under: “1. Learned Counsel for the Respondent/GNCTD states that the Finance Department has given concurrence for enhancement of remuneration of Law Researchers from Rs.35,000/- to Rs.50,000/- w.e.f., 07.08.2018 to 31.07.2019 and from Rs.50,000 to Rs.65,000/- w.e.f., 01.08.2019 to 30.09.2021. 2. It is stated by the learned Counsel for the Respondent/GNCTD that steps are being taken to clear the arrears of the remuneration of Law Researchers and it is expected that the arrears would be cleared within eight weeks from today.”

12. However, presently, Mr. Reetesh Singh, ld. Principal Secretary (Law, Justice & LA), GNCTD, as also ld. Counsel appearing for the GNCTD submit that the recommendation has been approved by GNCTD, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:01.11.2025 17:18:57 W.P.(C) 7998/2025 but only with prospective effect and the payment of arrears has not been approved w.e.f. 1st October 2022. It is submitted that there were some objections by the Finance Department, GNCTD in this regard. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner has also placed 13. reliance on Article 229 of the Constitution of India which clearly empowers the Chief Justice of the High Court to decide the terms and conditions of appointment and other administrative expenses of the High Court. 14. In view of the aforesaid, as also the previous precedent in mind, let the Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, GNCTD, file an affidavit as to why the decision of the Committee of this Court shall not be given effect from 1st October, 2022. Let the said affidavit be filed before the next date of hearing.”

10. Pursuant to the above order dated 9th September, 2025, an affidavit has been filed by Mr. Bipul Pathak, Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Finance, GNCTD. The said affidavit primarily records the various steps that were taken for approval of the proposal sent by Hon’ble the Chief Justice regarding the enhancement of the remuneration of LRs. In conclusion, the affidavit states as under: “7. The comments of the Finance Department has been provided to the Administrative Department after obtaining the approval of Competent Authority. 8. That from the above, it is clearly evident that Finance Department only provided its views/comments and suggestions on draft cabinet note of Administrative Department which is as part of the inter-departmental consultation process. 9. Further, the Secretary, Law Department, placed the proposal before the Cabinet and explained its key contours. However, the final decision rests with the Council of Ministers, taken after due deliberation and upon considering the detailed briefing provided by the Law Secretary.” Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:01.11.2025 17:18:57 W.P.(C) 7998/2025

11. A perusal of the above would show that the only stand of the GNCTD is that the final decision on enhancement of the remuneration in this matter rests with the Council of Ministers and the same has been taken after due deliberation.

12. Mr. Ankit Jain, ld. Sr. Counsel for the Petitioners has drawn attention of this Court towards the various documents on record. Insofar as the legal issue is concerned, reliance is placed upon Article 229 of the Constitution of India, as also the judgment of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Employees’ Welfare Association v. Union of India & Anr. 1989 (4) SCC

13. It is Mr. Jain, ld. Sr. Counsel’s submission that the reading of Article 229, along with the decision in Supreme Court Employees’ Welfare Association (supra) would leave no doubt that insofar as the terms and conditions for engagement of LRs is concerned, the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court would be the authority who would prescribe the terms and conditions and nature of engagement.

14. Further reliance is also placed upon the fact that on previous occasions when such enhancement in remuneration of LRs was made, the same was accepted by the GNCTD in terms of the decision taken by the High Court at that time. It is thus submitted that the non-approval of enhancement by GNCTD in terms of the minutes approved by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice with effect from 1st October, 2022 would not be tenable.

15. On the other hand, ld. Counsel appearing for the Finance Department, GNCTD submits that when the decision was taken by the Committee of Judges of the High Court of Delhi and, thereafter, by the Hon’ble the Chief Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:01.11.2025 17:18:57 W.P.(C) 7998/2025 Justice, the budgetary considerations may not have been taken into account.

16. The Court has considered the matter.

17. Article 229 of the Constitution of India clearly provides that the terms and conditions of service for the officers and servants of the High Court would be in terms of the rules prescribed by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the High Court itself. This provision has further been considered by the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Employees’ Welfare Association (supra) where it has been observed as under: “57. So far as the Supreme Court and the High Courts are concerned, the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, are empowered to frame rules subject to this that when the rules are framed by the Chief Justice of India or by the Chief Justice of the High Court relating to salaries, allowances, leave or pensions, the approval of the President of India or the Governor, as the case may be, is required. It is apparent that the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justice of the High Court have been placed at a higher level in regard to the framing of rules containing the conditions of service. It is true that the President of India cannot be compelled to grant approval to the rules framed by the Chief Justice of India relating to salaries, allowances, leave or pensions, but it is equally true that when such rules have been framed by a very high dignitary of the State, it should be looked upon with respect and unless there is very good reason not to grant approval, the approval should always be granted. If the President of India is of the view that the approval cannot be granted, he cannot straightway refuse to grant such approval, but before doing so, there must be exchange of thoughts between the President of India and the Chief Justice of India.