- (1.) AMITAVA Lala, J. This is a matter of pay fixation of the Section Officers holding the equivalent post of Administrative Officer (Judicial) under the serial No. 8 of the statement showing the pay scales of officers/officials of Delhi High Court being dated 14-12-2004. Supreme Court was pleased to pass an order on 27-9-2004 as follows : "we, therefore, are of the opinion that the impugned judgments cannot be sustained which are set aside accordingly. However, this order shall be subject to the rules framed by the Chief Justice in the case of the Private Secretaries of the High Court. It will, however be open to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court to frame appropriate rules as has been done in the case of the Private Secretaries or constitute an appropriate committee for the said purpose. We have no doubt in our mind that if such committee is constituted and any recommendation is made for enhancement of the scale of pay for the concerned officers by the Chief Justice, the same would be considered by the State Government in its proper perspective and in the light of the observations made hereinbefore expeditiously. For the reasons aforementioned, these appeals are allowed with the aforementioned observations. No costs. "
(2.) HOWEVER, on the basis of such order a Committee of four Judges was formed by the Chief Justice. Such Committee made a report. An important observation of the report is as follows : "the Court has framed separate service rules including rules of pay for the Private Secretaries of the Court. We do not find any justification in denying the same pay scales to the Section Officer of the Court. We also do not find justification to deny the same benefits of the pay scales to the Section Officers of this Court which are applicable to the Section Officers of the Delhi High Court who are carrying out same duties and responsibilities. " The ultimate recommendation of the Committee as regards Section Officers is as follows : "the Section Officers of the establishment of the High Court be divided into two categories namely Section Officer Grade-I and Section Officer Grade-II. They should be placed in the pay scales of Rs. 6500- 10500 and 10000-15200 respectively. The promotion from Section Officer Grade-I should be upgraded as Section Officer Grade-II on the basis of seniority, subject to satisfactory service of five years. " On the basis of the report of the Committee Chief Justice has passed the following order : "in view of the set aside of the Division Bench judgment in the Section Officers Brotherhood's case delivered by Hon'ble S. H. Z. Raza and Hon'ble Krishna Kumar, JJ reported in 2000 (2) LBESR 375 (All) : 2000 (1) UPLBEC 371, by the Supreme Court judgment delivered by Hon'ble S. B. Sinha, J. On 27-9-2004, it falls to the Chief Justice to frame appropriate committee for the cases of Section Officers. The recommendation of four Judge Committee in this regard is as follows : "the Section Officers of the establishment of the High Court be divided into two categories namely, Section Officer Grade I and Section Officer Grade II. They should be placed in the pay scale of Rs. 6500- 10500 and Rs. 10000-15200 respectively. The promotion from Section Officer Grade I should be upgraded as Section Officer Grade II on the basis of seniority, subject to satisfactory service of five years. " Since the Grade II Pay scale of Rs. 10000-15200 is not equated to corresponding pay scale of the Secretariat, it is recommended on the basis of the Committee's suggestion that the Government do frame rules for protection the earlier drawing Grade II Section Officers pay of Rs. 10000-15200 on personal protection basis, in view of the legitimate expectation given rise to by the Division Bench judgment which has however, been now set aside. This personal pay protection might be kept separate from attaching to the post and as and when the Grade II Section Officers go out of service one by one the grade of Section Officers might ultimate be reduced to one class only i. e. Section Officer Grade I drawing the post pay which is equal to me Secretaries corresponding post pay. "
(3.) THEREAFTER, nothing happened with regard to the recommendation made by the Committee and order passed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice. The recommendation is dated 28-10-2004 when the order of the Chief Justice is dated 3-8-2005. The petitioners contended that several representations have been made including the last representation dated 21-12-2006 but all are in vain. Therefore, we are of the view that the State Government cannot sit tight over the matter indefinitely without consideration particularly when the Chief Justice has passed an order on the basis of the recommendation of the Judges Committee and forwarded to the State for taking necessary steps. State cannot take the matter so lightly in such circumstances at all. The staff of the High Court is under the protective umbrella of the Chief Justice. Officers and servants of the Court in the strict sense, may be Government servants, but their position is entirely different and free from the control of the Government. Their service conditions are regulated by the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice is the highest functionary on the judicial side of the State. He is the head and heart of the judicial system at the State level. Even thereafter if the State takes the matter so lightly it will tantamounts to potential threat to the independency of the judiciary which cannot be any welcoming situation. The competent authority of the Government will have to take a decision at the earliest and for which a time bound programme is necessary to be made.;