PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 645
Court there was a guarantee that two judicial officers will bring to bear their judgment on the case ? That provision is taken away now and now it is open to the appointing authority to appoint both the members from among advocates. Why should there be such a radical change between the provisions of the Bill and the amemdment contemplated, which may bring in persons who may take part in politics ?
Shri T. T. Krishnamachari : So long as the appointments vest in the Election Commissioner, we can leave it to him to see that the people who are appointed are above suspicion.
Dr. Ambedkar: May I say a word, Sir to clear the matter ? Really the substantial question that we have to consider is whether we should retain the provisions contained in clause
103,—that is the fundamental point,—whether we want this, matter to be so dragged as to require the intervention of the High Court. The Committee all along felt that we have no idea as to the number of election petitions and we have no idea as to whether the judicial staff that would be wanted for the purpose of disposing of the election petitions would be adequate for the purpose of constituting the necessary number of tribunals. That was the difficulty that we have all along felt. Consequently we decided in the Select Committee that sub-clause (b) be added—I think you will remember that,—on account of the difficulty that was felt that if the personnel was confined only to judicial officers in the service of the Government there may be great difficulty. Therefore sub-clause (b) was brought in.
Now, with regard to the question that a lawyer may be appointed who might have played some part in politics and may have developed some kind of a bias in favour of one party as against the other, or who may have been a candidate in an election that difficulty is sought to be met in two ways. The first is this: that it is not every advocate who would be eligible for the purpose of being appointed. The restrictions are very many. First of all he must be a lawyer who is approved by the High Court. You will see the words are: “a list of advocates of that High Court who have been in practice for a period of not less than ten years and who are in the opinion of the High Court, fit to be appointed as such members.” I