Pay Hike For High Court Staff : Supreme Court Requests Tripura HC To Defer Contempt Proceedings Against State

The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a special leave petition filed by the State of Tripura challenging an interim order passed by the Tripura High Court which directed the state government to enhance the salary of the staff of the High Court as per the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission with effect from January 1, 2006.

In the order passed in December 2021, the High Court also directed the State to pay the salary arrears as well in three monthly instalments starting from January 2022. Later, the High Court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against the State Government for not implementing the directions.

Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar, representing the State of Tripura, told the Supreme Court that the High Court has summoned the Chief Secretary in the contempt proceedings asking him to appear on July 25. 

A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna, while issuing notice returnable within 3 weeks on the State's SLP, requested the High Court to defer the contempt proceedings in the meantime.

The High Court passed the directions in a petition filed by the High Court Employees Association. A single bench of the High Court noted that the benefit of the 6th Central Pay Commission recommendations are given to the staff of the subordinate judiciary. Therefore, invoking the doctrine of equal pay for equal work, the single bench directed the State to extend the same benefit to the staff of the High Court as well. The state filed a writ appeal before the division bench against the judgment of the single bench. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Indrajit Mahanty and Justice SG Chattopadhyay on December 21, 2021, passed an interim order directing the State to implement the single bench directions subject to condition that the employees should refund the payments received as per the directions in case of their reversal.

Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar argued before the Supreme Court that the High Court's directions are contrary to the service rules governing the HC staff. He referred to Rule 16 of the High Court of Tripura Services (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Conduct) Rules, 2014, which states that the payscale of the High Court staff will be equivalent to that of the State Government employees. The State Government employees are not yet given the benefits of the 6th CPC report. Therefore, the HC staff cannot claim the same. 

Kumar also submitted that the High Court directions will create a huge burden on the state budget. He also pointed out that the issue regarding the entitlement of subordinate judiciary to 6th CPC recommendations is a subject matter of the case State of Tripura v Tarun Kumar Singh CA. 9198-9199/2018 pending before the Supreme Court.

Related : Supreme Court To Hear UP Govt Challenge Against Allahabad HC Order To Enhance Salaries Of Court Staff

(Case Title : The State of Tripura vs High Court Employees Association, SLP(c) 8768/2022)

Click Here To Read/Download Order