842 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
them independent of the executive is to deprive them of any office with which the executive might tempt them to depart from their duty. It is quite true that an office which is not an office of profit but an honorary office does not involve pay. But as every body knows pay is not the only thing which a person obtains by reason of his post. There is such a tiling as “pay, pickings and pilferings”. But even if it is not so. there is a certain amount of influence which an office gives to a person. And I think it is desirable to exclude even the possibility of such a person being placed in a post where, although he may not get a salary, he may obtain certain degree of influence.
Now, I come to the amendment of my Friend Mr. Kunzru. I quite agree with him that there is obviously a distinction made between the services to be employed under the Public Service Commission and the services to be employed under the High Court, the Supreme Court and the Auditor-General. I would like to explain why we have made this distinction. With regard to the staff of the High Court and the Supreme Court, at any rate those who are occupying the highest places are required to exercise a certain amount of judicial discretion. Consequently we felt that not only their salaries and pensions should he determined by the Chief Justice with the approval of the President but the conditions of their service also should be left to be determined by the Chief Justice. In the case of the Public Service Commission much of the staff—in fact the whole of the staff—will be merely concerned with what we call “ministerial duties” where there is no authority and no discretion is left. That is the reason why we have made this distinction. But I quite see that my argument is probably not as sound as it might appear. All the same I would suggest to my honourable Friend Pandit Kunzru to allow this article to go through on the promise that at a later stage if I find that there is a necessity to make a change I will come before the House with the necessary amendment.
Sir, my attention is drawn to the fact in the cyclostyled copy of my amendment to article 285-A in sub-clause (3)(b) the words ought to be ‘in any paid employment’.. They have been typed wrongly as ‘in any body’s employment.’ I hope the correction will be made.
As I said to Pandit Kunzru, the Drafting Committee will look into the matter and if it feels that there are grounds to make any alteration they will, with the permission of the House come forward with an amendment so that the position may be rectified.
Mr. President : I will now put the amendments to vote first.
The question is :—
“That in amendment No. 3 above, in the proviso to clause (1) of the proposed article 285, for the word ‘one-half’ the word ‘one third’ be substituted.”