1096 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not think there is any substance in this particular point made by Mr. Kamath.
With regard to the question of the amount of salaries there have been a variety of views expressed in the House. My Friend Mr. Shibban Lal Saksena went to the length of saying that the President ought not to get more than one rupee. Well, I suppose, on that remuneration no one would be available to function as the President, except a wandering Sanyasi, and I have no doubt that a wandering Sanyasi would be the most unfit person to be the President of the Union, whatever may be his other virtures.
With regard to the judges’ salary two questions have been raised. There are some here in this House who have said that the judges’ salaries should be at a higher level than what is fixed in the Schedule. There are others who have said that the standard of salary we have fixed has no relation to the capacity of the country to pay. In my judgement, the slogan that anything that we could fix in this country should have relation to the income of the people is a good piece of political slogan, but I am not prepared to say that it is practical politics. Salaries in this country, as well as in every other country, most depend upon the law of supply and demand. Unfortunately or fortunately, there are many number of people who can be found suitable to function as Members of the Legislature, consequently we fix their salaries at a much lower level. Fortunately or unfortunately, the supply of persons who can function as judges is very limited. I do not propose to say that it is a rarity. But certainly it is a very difficult commodity to obtain and consequently we are required to pay the market price. I am sure that in my judgment the salary fixed in this Schedule conforms to what might be called the market price. Therefore, I do not think that there can be any serious quarrel on the level of salary that we have fixed.
Then I come to the amendment moved by my Friend, Mr. Himatsingka. I should like to say that he and I have the same case in mind and I have the greatest sympathy for the case he has in mind. But what he wants to do is to ask me to accept a general proposition, that is to say, a proposition saying “any judge appointed in any territory mentioned in Part I”. I think it is not desirable to introduce in these clauses an amendment in general terms, for the simple reason that after the 31st October 1948, having regard to the provisions of our Constitution, there can be no distinction in the salary of judges on a provincial basis. All judges have been placed on the same basis irrespective of the High Court of the area within which that High Court is situated. Therefore, a general provision to remove any anomaly is not necessary because such an anomaly is not likely to recur.