13
ON THE BENCH

As SOON AS he assumed charge of his office, Sir Trevor Harries tried to persuade me to accept a permanent appointment on the Bench. This would have then meant supersession of four of the sitting additional judges. Though this would have reduced my income to about 40 per cent of what I was then earning besides involving the refunding of over a lakh of rupees I had received as fee from clients, I could not very well decline. I tried to keep my distance so that the Chief Justice may in time forget all about it. But soon Sir Trevor Harries returned to the charge. One evening he telephoned me to come and have tea with him at his residence. There were only two of us at tea. He now told me that it was the highest tradition of the Bar that when offered a judgeship, an advocate should not refuse the offer, and that administration of justice was the highest service that one could do to his country. He added that a seat on the Bench was the crowning glory of a legal career! This made it difficult for me to refuse the offer. There was also a feeling of vanity that I would be superseding four additional judges. I told him that I would like to be considered only for a permanent appointment. If the Governor or the Viceroy or the Secretary of State. was not willing to offer me a permanent appointment involving supersession of four additional judges, one of whom was an Englishman, I was not interested in merely an additional appointment. Sir Trevor wrote to me on 13 April, 1943, “I have seen the Governor and I think that all is well. Can I now tell him definitely that you would accept the appointment as a permanent judge of the Court as and on from the 27th of September, 1943? Of course the Governor does nothing more than recommend; but I have never heard of a case in which the recommendation of the Governor and the Chief Justice has not been accepted.

to be continued...