Supreme Court Questions State Spending Priorities Amid Judicial Pay Concerns

The Supreme Court criticized state governments for financial mismanagement, highlighting the contrast between funding election freebies and neglecting judicial salaries. Justices referenced schemes like Maharashtra's 'Ladli-Behna Yojna' and election promises as evidence of skewed priorities amid financial constraints, complicating negotiations on judicial pay scales.

The Supreme Court expressed concerns on Tuesday about state governments prioritizing freebies over salaries for district judiciary judges, despite financial crunches. A bench consisting of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih cited Maharashtra's 'Ladli-Behna Yojna' and election promises in Delhi to illustrate a pattern of questionable fiscal priorities.

The bench remarked on states' readiness to allocate funds during election times for non-work-related benefits, while pleading fiscal constraints for judicial payouts. 'Several political parties in Delhi have proclaimed cash incentives, promising Rs 2500 payouts if they gain office,' the bench noted, emphasizing the contradictions in fiscal allocations.

This discourse arose as Attorney General R Venkataramani pressed on governmental fiscal limitations in setting judicial pay and pension structures. The case, driven by the All India Judges Association, focuses on the enactment of recommendations from the Second National Judicial Pay Commission. (ANI)

(With inputs from agencies.)