Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The Finance Commission has suggested that the State may reconsider reemployment of retired Judges for limited period for disposal of the pending cases and it is in the case of Brij Mohan Lal v. Union of India (supra), the issue pertaining to the Fast Track Courts Ashish 23/40 Wp 3354-22.doc came to be decided and with regard to the recruitment on the Fast Track Court, certain directives were issued about the modality to be followed for appointing the Judges.

In the scheme of the Fast Track Courts, the Apex Court has clearly concluded that the appointment of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) on ad-hoc basis for a stipulated period, though mentioned it to be ad-hoc appointment, it cannot be said to be merely contractual appointment.

21. The next question that was also determined, in the very same decision was whether the service rendered by the judicial officers as Fast Track Court Judges, is liable to be counted for their pensionary and other benefits, as they subsequently joined the regular judicial service and reliance was placed upon the earlier decision in case of Mahesh Chandra Verma vs. State of Jharkhand11 , where it was specifically held as under:-

"16. We believe that it is a matter of great regret that these appellants who have performed the functions of a Judge to the satisfaction of the competent authorities should be deprived of their pension and retiral benefits for this period of service. The appellants were not pressing before us any case of seniority over any person who may have been recruited subsequently, nor for any other benefit. In fact, we had made it clear to the appellants that we are only examining the issue of giving the benefits 11 (2018) 7 SCC 270 Ashish 26/40 Wp 3354-22.doc of their service in the capacity of Fast Track Court Judges to be counted towards their length of service for pensionary and retiral benefits. To deny the same would be unjust and unfair to the appellants. In any case, keeping in mind the spirit of the directions made under Article 142 of the Constitution of India in Brij Mohan Lal and in Mahesh Chandra Verma, the necessary corollary must also follow, of giving benefit of the period of service in Fast Track Courts for their pension and retiral benefits. The methodology of non-creation of adequate regular cadre posts and the consequent establishment of Fast Track Courts manned by the appellants cannot be used as a ruse to deny the dues of the appellants.

The appointment order issued to the Petitioners indicated it to be period of two years, which was permitted to be extended until continuation of the Fast Track Courts Scheme, and it is not in dispute that the Scheme was continued by the State Government and even as on date, it remains in force though under a distinct caption of 'National Mission for Safety of Women' by creating 138 special Fast Track Courts to deal with crime against women and children to which the Government of Maharashtra, through its Law and Judiciary Department, has accorded its approval vide resolution dated 4/03/2020.