If I may say so, the amendment seems to be very confused. It says that it shall apply to a person who has served “for a period of five years continuously“. That means if the President appointed a Judge for less than five years he would not be subject to this, which would defeat the very purpose that Prof. K. T. Shah has in mind. It would perfectly be open to the President in any particular case to appoint a Judge for a short period of less than five years and reward him by any post such as that of Ambassador or Consul or Trade Commissioner, etc. The whole thing seems to me quite ill-conceived.
