642 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
beginning when the Letters Patent were issued in the year 1865, the Central Legislature, or the Provincial Legislatures, have not thought fit in any way to alter the powers of appeal from the decree, final order or judgment of the High Court. Therfore, the House will realize that these sections which deal with the right of appeal from the final order, decree and judgment of the High court have history extending over practically 75 to 80 years. They have remained absolutely undisturbed. Consequently, in my judgment, it would require a very powerful argument in support of a plea that we should now, white enacting a provision for the constitution of the Supreme Court, disturb a position which has stood the test of lime for such a long period.
It seems to me that not very long ago, this House sitting in another capacity as a Legislative Assembly, had been insisting that these powers which under the Government of India Act were exercised by the Privy Council, should forthwith, immediately, without any kind of dimunition or denudation be conferred upon the Federal Court. It therefore seems to me somewhat odd that when we have constituted a Supreme Court, which is to take the place of the Federal Court, and when we have an opportunity of transferring powers of the Privy Council to the Supreme Court, a position should have been taken that these provisions should not be reproduced in the form in which they exist today. As I say, that seems to me somewhat odd. Therefore, my first point is this that there is no substantial, no material, change at all. We are merely reproducing the position as between the High Court and the Privy Council and establishing them as between the High Court and the Supreme Court.
Now, Sir, I will come to the exact amendments of which I made mention in the opening of my speech, namely, Prof. Shibban Lai Saksena’s amendment and my amendment No. 25. If my amendment went through, the result would be this : that (he Supreme Court would continue to be a Court of Appeal and Parliament would not be able to reduce its position as a Court of Appeal, although it may have the power to reduce the number of appeals, or the nature of appeals that may go to the Supreme Court. In any case, sub-clause (c) of article 111 would remain intact and beyond the power of Parliament. My view is that although we may leave it to Parliament to decide the monetary value of cases which may go to the Privy Council, the last part of clause (I) of article 111, which is (c), ought to remain as it is and Parliament