The Supreme Court on September 30, 2024, ordered the State of Bihar to release forthwith the salary of sitting Patna High Court Judge Justice R.P. Mishra, who had pending arrears from the date of his elevation to the High Court.

The Court passed this interim order taking into consideration the urgency as "no judge should be expected to work without a salary."

"At this stage, prima facie an interim order would be required since no judge should be expected to work without a salary. We direct that the salary withheld shall be released to him by Bihar government, inclusive of all arrears. A temporary GPF account may be opened in the name of Justice RP Mishra. These directions shall be abided by the further directions that may be issued or by the final result of the petition as the case maybe."

A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra heard a bunch of matters pertaining to the pending release of salaries for Patna High Court Judges as well as an issue relating to fixation of pensions for judicial officers.

Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra, who was elevated to the High Court in November 2023, had not received a GPF or salary since his elevation. About the same, CJI questioned the approach taken by the Patna High Court.

"Why is Justice RP Mishra's salary not yet released? Why are they denying him salary? People like him appointed in HC will get services like all other HC judges."

The bench ruled that Justice Mishra, who was previously governed under the New Pension Scheme, will now be governed by service conditions equal to those of other High Court judges upon his elevation. The court ordered the State Government to release Mishra's salary and outstanding arrears.

"While the judge was governed by NPS as district judiciary judge, once he stands appointed as the judge of the High Court, he will be governed at par with all HC judges by the same terms of conditions of service."

The bench will further hear the matter on October 3, 2024.

Case Details: Justice Shailendra Singh & Ors. v. UoI & Ors., WP(C)/232/2023