New Delhi [India], July 8 : The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought a response from the Delhi government on a petition filed by a group of law researchers who worked with High Court judges between 2018 and 2025. The petitioners are demanding the implementation of a 2023 order that raised their monthly remuneration to Rs 80,000.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that law researchers significantly contribute to the judicial system, often working late nights and weekends. The Court remarked that, on the face of it, the Delhi government must decide on the matter.
The judges noted that while the Chief Justice approved the enhanced remuneration in 2023, it was duly cleared by the High Court administration, it has not yet been enforced by the Delhi government. The Court has now issued a notice and set the next hearing for August 21.
Previously, Justices Navin Chawla and Ajay Digpaul recused themselves from the case, citing conflicts of interest.
The plea also seeks arrears dating back to October 1, 2022, along with 18 per cent annual interest, highlighting the financial delay despite clear administrative backing.
The petitioners referred to Article 229 of the Constitution, under which the Delhi High Court framed its Establishment Rules in 1972, creating over 120 law researcher posts.
Although multiple salary revisions had been approved, Rs 25,000 initially, raised to Rs 35,000 in 2017, Rs 50,000 in 2018, Rs 65,000 in 2019, and Rs 80,000 in 2022, the last approved hike has remained stalled with the Delhi government.
Despite repeated representations and even RTI applications filed in 2024, law researchers discovered that the salary hike proposal, forwarded to the GNCTD in September 2023, remains unapproved. RTI replies indicated that crucial information was being withheld under exemption clauses, and bureaucratic hurdles in the Finance and Law Departments have delayed any progress.
Justice C Harishankar, during an earlier hearing, acknowledged that law researchers often work longer hours than judges and that their pay lags behind their counterparts in the Supreme Court.He emphasised that after nearly two years of waiting since the Chief Justice cleared the Rs 80,000 proposal, continued inaction is unjustified.
The petitioners argue that this prolonged delay, despite constitutional and administrative approvals, violates their rights and warrants immediate judicial intervention to ensure fair compensation.