The Supreme Court on Friday decided to entertain a plea filed by Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra, a sitting judge of the Patna High Court, shedding light on his struggle to obtain the opening of a General Provident Fund (GPF) account and the subsequent release of his salary.

A three-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, issued notices to the Union of India and the State of Bihar, as well as sought a response from the Registrar General of the Patna High Court. The petition, represented by Advocate Prem Prakash, pressed for interim relief during the hearing.

Justice Mishra, who was elevated to the High Court in November 2023 from the higher judicial services, presented his case, asserting that despite completing all required documentation, he is yet to be allotted a GPF account. The crux of the matter lies in Section 20 of the High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of service) Act, 1954, which states that every judge is entitled to subscribe to the General Provident Fund (Central Services). The Act further specifies that judges who held pensionable civil posts before their appointment shall continue to subscribe to the Provident Fund they were enrolled in before assuming the judicial position.

The plea emphasized that the denial of GPF benefits has resulted in Justice Mishra not receiving his salary since his elevation. This financial setback has led to considerable mental and financial instability for the petitioner.

Despite the pressing circumstances, the Supreme Court refrained from passing any interim orders but assured that the matter would be heard in due course. The case has been scheduled for consideration on January 29, 2024.

The court's order, as documented, reads: "Issue notice. Liberty to serve the Central Agency dasti, in addition. Tag with Writ Petition (C) No 232 of 2023. List the Petition with connected matter(s) on 29 January 2024."

Justice Mishra's plea seeks a declaration from the Supreme Court affirming his entitlement to a GPF account, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the 1954 Act. The outcome of this case holds significance not only for the individual judge but also for the broader interpretation and application of judicial service-related regulations.

Case: Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra vs Union of India & Ors,

Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).3/2024.

Click to read/download order.