Case Law Details
Madras Bar Association Vs Union of India & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court held that If it is not possible to provide housing to the members of the tribunal, the UOI was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1.5 lakhs as HRA to the Chairman & Vice-Chairman and Rs. 1.25 lakhs per month to the members of the Tribunals. The Learned Attorney General submitted that standard HRA for all members is not appropriate. Fixation of a static amount may lead to HRA becoming inadequate after a few years due to inflation, according to him. A clarification is sought in respect of Para 53 (v) by fixing HRA payable to members at twice the HRA payable to the Secretary to Government of India.
The UOI is directed to place on record the particulars of the members of the Tribunals working in X, Y, Z cities/towns and the amounts paid to them as HRA. Details of the accommodation provided to the members of the Tribunal shall also be provided. The UOI shall submit a proposal as to what amount would be reasonable towards HRA in case accommodation cannot be provided to members of the Tribunal.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT
1. This Miscellaneous Application has been filed for clarification of the judgment of this Court dated 27.11.2020 in W.P.(C) No. 804/2020. Learned Attorney General for India submitted that the direction given in para 53(ii) of the judgment pertaining to constitution of Search-cum-Selection Committee needs modification. It is submitted that the Secretary to the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India who is made a member of the Search-cum-Selection Committee should be substituted by a Secretary to the Government of India nominated by the Cabinet Secretary from a Department other than the parent or sponsoring department.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
