Judgment :- 1. The prayer in this writ petition is for issue of Mandamus directing the Union of India to recover the expenditure incurred by Thiru R. Venkataraman, the former President of India, for his personal visits to Kancheepuram Mutt. The petition was filed on 14.9.1992 supported by an affidavit dated 15.6.1992. In that affidavit it was alleged that the second respondent did not enjoy any special privilege and he was like any other citizen of India governed by Article 14 of the Constitution of India. As the Head of Executive, he could travel throughout India for any official purpose, but there was no provision anywhere in the Constitution or in any other law enabling him to utilise any transport of the Government for his personal visits, unless he paid for it from his own pocket. According to the affidavit, the Indian Constitution is entirely different from that of the American Constitution and any other Constitution in the World and there is no question of First Man and First Lady in this country. It was also alleged that from the date of assuming office, the second respondent used to visit Kancheepuram Mutt and for every visit he came all the way from New Delhi to Madras by a Special flight and from Madras to Kancheepuram he took three helicopters at the expense of the Government and the Government was not bound to provide him with any transport for those visits. 2. When the matter was posted before me for admission on 13.10.1992 I pointed out that the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition was too vague and very bald and the petition could not be considered on the strength of such an affidavit. Counsel took adjournments and another affidavit was filed on 23.10.1992. In that affidavit, reference has been made to Articles 52 to 55, 59(3) and 60 of the Constitution of India. Referring to Article 60, it is stated in the affidavit that the oath taken by the President at the time of assuming office is significant in that it requires the individual to devote himself to the service and well-being of the people of India. Referring to Article 60, it is stated in the affidavit that the oath taken by the President at the time of assuming office is significant in that it requires the individual to devote himself to the service and well-being of the people of India. It is further stated that the President of India enjoys a pre-eminent position and is the first citizen of India and only a very eminent person of a very high intellectual and moral calibre and political and public standing has, as a rule, been elected to the office of the President of India. According to the affidavit, the President must conduct himself in such a way that he is an example to the rest of the citizens of India and as the Head of the Executive, he can travel to any place in the World for any official purpose. It is stated that apart from the official functions, the President, being a citizen of India, does not enjoy any special privileges than any other citizen and he is also governed by Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The averments made in the earlier affidavit are repeated in the later affidavit and it is stated that the petitioner has no grievance as to the devotion of the second respondent towards any one of the three Sankaracharyas of the Kancheepuram Mutt in his individual capacity, but the second respondent had burdened the exchequer of the State considerably by making frequent visits to Kancheepuram by using the office of the President and privileges attached thereto. It is alleged that he had no power to utilise any transport of the government, unless he paid for it from his own pocket and the Government was not bound to provide him with transport for his personal visits. It is further stated that this Court has a constitutional duty under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the second respondent to refund all the expenses incurred in connection with his private visits to the Kancheepuram Mutt because the Constitution is secular in character and the preamble to the Constitution expressly refers to the same. 3. It is further stated that this Court has a constitutional duty under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the second respondent to refund all the expenses incurred in connection with his private visits to the Kancheepuram Mutt because the Constitution is secular in character and the preamble to the Constitution expressly refers to the same. 3. The second affidavit filed by the petitioner has not in any way improved the situation as both the affidavits are bereft of any details as to the alleged visits of the second respondent to the Kancheepuram Mutt or the expenses which might have been incurred thereby. Excepting to make a vague allegation that the court should draw an inference that many crores of rupees would have been spent on such visits, the two affidavits do not furnish any particulars of the same. In spite of several opportunities being given to counsel by adjourning the matter from time to time, counsel was not in a position to bring to the notice of the Court the relevant provisions in law regarding the privileges which can be enjoyed by the President of India. 4. Article 59 of the Constitution of India sets out the conditions of Presidents office as follows:— “59.(1) The President shall not be a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any state, and if a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any State be elected President, he shall be deemed to have vacated his seat in that House on the date on which he enters upon his office as President. (2) The President shall not hold any other office of profit. (3) The President shall be entitled without payment of rent to the use of his official residences and shall be also entitled to such emoluments, allowances and privileges as may be determined by Parliament by law and, until provision in that behalf is so made, such emoluments, allowances and privileges as are specified in the Second Schedule. (4) The emoluments and allowances of the President shall not be diminished during his term of office.” 5. Part A of the Second Schedule referred to in clause (3) of Article 59 of the Constitution fixes the salary of the President at Rs. 10,000/- per mensem. (4) The emoluments and allowances of the President shall not be diminished during his term of office.” 5. Part A of the Second Schedule referred to in clause (3) of Article 59 of the Constitution fixes the salary of the President at Rs. 10,000/- per mensem. Paragraph 2 of Part A provides that the President shall also be paid such allowances as were payable to the Governor General of the Dominion of India immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. Paragraph 3 is to the effect that the President shall, throughout his term of office, be entitled to the same privileges to which the Governor-General was entitled immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. The Parliament has not so far enacted any law determining the emoluments, allowances and privileges of the President as provided in Clause (3) of Article 59 of the Constitution. 6. Hence, it is necessary to ascertain the allowances which were payable to the Governor General of the Dominion of India and the privileges to which he was entitled immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. In the Government of India Act, 1915, S. 85 provided for payment to the Governor-General of India such salaries, not exceeding in any case the maximum specified in that behalf in the Second Schedule to the Act and such allowances (if any) for equipment and voyage, as the Secretary of State in Council may by order fix in that behalf, and, subject to or in default of any such order, as are payable at the commencement of the Act. The Second Schedule fixed only a maximum annual salary of the Governor-General of India at two hundred and fifty-six thousand rupees. S. 7(3) of the Government of India. Act, 1935, read as follows:— “The provisions of the Third Schedule to this Act shall have effect with respect to the salary and allowances of the Governor-General and the provision to be made for enabling him to discharge conveniently and with dignity the duties of his office .” (Underlining mine.) The underlined part of the sub-Section is significant in my opinion. The third Schedule to the Act prescribed the annual salary of the Governor-General at Rs. 2,50,800/-. Clause 2 of the said Schedule was in the following terms:— “2. The third Schedule to the Act prescribed the annual salary of the Governor-General at Rs. 2,50,800/-. Clause 2 of the said Schedule was in the following terms:— “2. There shall be paid to the Governor-General and to the Governors such allowances for expenses in respect of equipment and travelling upon appointment and such allowances during their terms of office as may from time to time be fixed by His Majesty in Council, and such provision shall be made for enabling the Governor-General and the Governors to discharge conveniently and with dignity the duties of their offices as may be determined by His Majesty in Council.” It is seen that the words in S. 7(3) of the Act underlined by me are repeated in paragraph 2 of the schedule. 7. The India (Provisional Constitution) Order 1947 amended the Third Schedule by substituting the words “fixed by His Majesty in Council” in paragraph 2 thereof by the words “fixed, as respects the Governor-General by Act of the Dominion Legislature, and as respects Governor by order of the Governor-General” and the words “determined by His Majesty in Council” in the said paragraph by the words “so determined”. The same order added another paragraph to the Schedule, numbered as paragraph 7, which was a transitory provision, entitling the Governor-General to the same allowances and privileges as he was entitled to immediately before the date of the establishment of the Dominion under the rules and orders then in force, until other provisions were made by Act of the Dominion Legislature. 8. The Indian Independence Act, 1947 directed that the Constituent Assembly, which had its first sitting on the 9th December, 1946, was to be the Constituent Assembly of ‘India’. The Assembly reassembled after the mid-night of the 14th August, 1947, as the sovereign Constituent Assembly for India. A drafting Committee was appointed on the 29th August, 1947 for drafting a Constitution for the country. A draft was presented to the Constituent Assembly on the 4th November, 1948, and after a brief general discussion, which may be called the first reading of the Constitution, there was a second reading which commenced on the 15th November, 1948, and terminated on the 17th October, 1949. A draft was presented to the Constituent Assembly on the 4th November, 1948, and after a brief general discussion, which may be called the first reading of the Constitution, there was a second reading which commenced on the 15th November, 1948, and terminated on the 17th October, 1949. The Constituent Assembly again sat on the 14th of November 1949 for the third reading, which was finished on the 26th November, 1949, on which date the Constitution received the signature of the President of the Assembly and declared as passed. It may be incidentally mentioned that the country is celebrating the 26th of November every year as the “Law Day”, thanks to the initiative taken by the Supreme Court Bar Association in 1979 and the proclamation made by the then Chief Justice of India. 9. In the draft Constitution, Article 48 prescribed the conditions of the Presidents office. Clause(3) thereof provided that the President shall have an official residence and he shall be paid such emoluments and allowances as may be determined by Parliament by law and, until provision in that behalf is so made, such emoluments and allowances as are specified in the Second Schedule. Part I of the Second Schedule prescribed the salary of the President to be Rs. 5,500/- per mensem and provided for allowances to enable him to discharge conveniently and with dignity the duties of his office. Paragraphs 3 and 4 in Part I of the Second Schedule read as follows:— “3. There shall be also paid to the President and a Governor an allowance equal to the actual expenses respectively incurred by them in travelling with their families, if any, and their families effects to take up the appointment of the President or Governor as the case may be. 4. The President and each Governor throughout their respective terms of office shall be entitled without payment of rent or hire to the use of the official residences and of the railway saloons, river craft, air craft and motor cars provided for their respective use and no charge shall fall on them personally in respect of the maintenance thereof.” When the Draft Constitution was discussed in the Assembly, Sri H.V. Kamath suggested that the reference to an official residence in clause (3) of Article 48 shall be omitted. According to him, it was insignificant and minor details like that should not be introduced in the Constitution. According to him, it was insignificant and minor details like that should not be introduced in the Constitution. Dr. Ambedkar pointed out that similar provisions were found in the Government of India Act and several orders in council and there was no harm in making a reference to the official residence. Ultimately, clause (3) of Article 48 of the Draft Constitution underwent some amendments and Article 59(3) as it reads at present was adopted in the final Constitution. 10. When the Second Schedule to the Draft Constitution Was taken up for discussion, Dr. Ambedkar moved for substituting Part I of the Schedule with Part A as it stands at present. There was considerable discussion as regards the salary and allowances payable to the President of India. Before the discussion commenced, Dr. Ambedkar pointed out to the Assembly that though the Government of India Act provided for the fixation of allowances by His Majesty in Council by order, no order was ever made by the Council although a draft was prepared in the year 1937. It was stated by him that the Government of India Act did not furnish any material basis to the Drafting Committee for coming to any definite conclusion and consequently, the Committee left the matter with the provision that the President shall continue to get the same allowances which the Governor-General get at the commencement of the Constitution, he submitted that the Parliament may later on change the salary and allowances of the President and subject to that, there shall not be change during the tenure of the President concerned. He brought to the notice of the House that the allowances payable to the Governor-General at the commencement of the Constitution as borne out by the Budget Estimates for 1949-1950 were as follows:— 1. Sumptuary allowance of Rs. 45,000 per annum. 2. Expenditure from contract allowance Rs. 4,65,000. 3. State Conveyance: Motor Cars: Rs. 73,000. 4. Tour expenses: Rs. 81,000. Thus, the total allowances were Rs. 6,64,000, according to the budget estimate of 1949-1950. That was in addition to the salary fixed by the Government of India Act. He submitted that the salary of Rs. 10,000/- per mensem for the President fixed by the Drafting Committee was very reasonable. Shri Mahavir Tyagi contended that high salary should not be fixed for the President. 6,64,000, according to the budget estimate of 1949-1950. That was in addition to the salary fixed by the Government of India Act. He submitted that the salary of Rs. 10,000/- per mensem for the President fixed by the Drafting Committee was very reasonable. Shri Mahavir Tyagi contended that high salary should not be fixed for the President. According to him, dignity was not determined by money and in India sacrifice and penance had always commanded respect. The following part of his speech is interesting:— “I think that the President of a nation is the symbol of its dignity. It is wrong to think in India that we can have dignity only through money. ( Hear, hear ). A dignified position can be achieved here only through sacrifice. It would be wishful thinking among us if I want that the presidential post should be honorary. The State should bear his expenses. But the person who holds the highest post in the land should lead as simple life as that of a sanyasi. This is a land of the poor and the money that is realised from them through taxes increases their poverty. I do not think that politicians should freely use that money for their personal use.” 11. Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena suggested that the salary of the President should be fixed at Rs. 1/-per mensem. He spoke thus:— Disclaimer: The text is computer generated. The user must verify the authenticity of the extracted portion with the certified copy of the judgment. This extract is taken from M. Palanibaba v. Union of India, (1993) 1 LW 11 , at page 16: “The President of the Republic in our Constitution is a substitute for the British King because we have modelled our Constitution on the British lines. Now, in our country the ideal of kingship is illustrated by Kings like Janaka who lived like Saoyasis. Even in our own times, our master, our father, Mahatma Gandhi put before us the same ideal. I therefore. think Sir, that by providing 1 rupee as the salary for the President, we shall only be doing something which is in consonance with our ancient civil isation and culture. So, by accepting this amendment, we shall be placing before the world and before the country, the ideals of our ancient civilization and culture. I therefore. think Sir, that by providing 1 rupee as the salary for the President, we shall only be doing something which is in consonance with our ancient civil isation and culture. So, by accepting this amendment, we shall be placing before the world and before the country, the ideals of our ancient civilization and culture. This will also ensure that the post of the President will not be aspired for by greedy men, but the honours shall be bestowed on men who are intellectually, morally and spiritually fit for the job, and who do not want to take it for the salary attached to it but who want to serve the country in the spirit of King Janaka, Mahatma Gandhi and other great kings of ancient India.” 12. Shri R.K. Sidhva moved for an amendment that the salary of the President shall be subject to income-tax. He did not, however, accept the suggestions of Shri Mahavir Tyagi and Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena, he said, “Coming to the amount of the salary, my honourable Friends Mr. Tyagi and Professor Shibban Lal Saksena stated that the Governor-General should be a Sanyasi. Probably they have been carried away by ideas with which we have been taught to serve humanity without receiving any remuneration. Several of us have done that in the past for the attainment of freedom and to serve humanity without receiving any amount of compensation or money. We have done free service to humanity. That is one thing. But, you should not mix up two things which are quite distinct. The Governor-General is the administrative head of the Government. He has been restricted by so many limitations in this Constitution. I ask whether the Presidents of the Indian National Congress or the Provincial Congress Committee are restricted by so many restrictions as are stated in this constitution. Is not our President of the Indian National congress at liberty to do what he likes and earn what he likes? Has not the President of the Provincial Congress Committee been earning?. But you know what the President ought to be. He should be above board. He should be a man of sterling character. Although not within the provisions of law, but morally, he is the custodian of the wealth of the country. He has to see how that wealth is being administered. For that purpose, a paltry salary is necessary. But you know what the President ought to be. He should be above board. He should be a man of sterling character. Although not within the provisions of law, but morally, he is the custodian of the wealth of the country. He has to see how that wealth is being administered. For that purpose, a paltry salary is necessary. I use of word paltry; compare the salary of 20,000 minus Income-tax which came to about Rs. 9,000 the Viceroy drew, with the net salary of about 5,000 to be drawn by the President. Is it not a great sacrifice that our people are making one hundred per cent out of the previous salary of the Governor-General and fifty percent of the previous Governors salaries?” Shri R.K. Sidhva suggested that the President shall draw a lump sum of Rs. 13,500 per mensem which shall include the cost of renewal, repair and maintenance of furniture and motor vehicles, and also sumptuary, contract and all other allowances. He also suggested that the President shall draw in addition a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per annum as touring expenses. 13. Shri. H.V. Kamath agreed with Shri Mahavir Tyagi that the highest dignitaries of the State, the President, the judges and the ministers of the State ought to be genuine tyagis in mind and spirit. However, he stated that salaries should be provided for high dignitaries and stated, “I feel that every person, every human being, his mind and spirit, is conditioned by the limitations of his body which persists in his corporeal or embodied existence in this world. He has got to be placed above want; he has got to be placed above fear; he has got to be placed above insecurity. Therefore salaries are and should be provided.” 14. Shri Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar stated thus: “Then, so far the Presidents allowances are concerned, there is no need to go into the question of the allowances of the President, because Parliament is the supreme master of the situation. Instead of cumbering the Constitution with a detailed list of the allowances to which the President is entitled, reference is made to the fact that for the time being the President will be entitled to the allowances which the Governor-General was having. Instead of cumbering the Constitution with a detailed list of the allowances to which the President is entitled, reference is made to the fact that for the time being the President will be entitled to the allowances which the Governor-General was having. Later on, it will be open to Parliament to go into the whole question and revise the allowances as circumstances, the needs of the country and the dignity of the position of the President would require. 15. Dr. Ambedkar, in his reply observed, “With regard to the question of the amount of salaries there have been a variety of views expressed in the House. My friend Mr. Shibban Lal Saksena went to the length of saying that the President ought not to get more than one rupee. Well, I suppose, on that remuneration no one would be available to function as the President, except a wandering Sanyasi , and I have no doubt that a wandering Sanyasi would be the most unfit person to be the President of the Union, whatever may be his other virtues.” 16. Ultimately, all the amendments suggested to Part I of the Schedule were negatived. Thus, it is seen that the Constituent Assembly discussed the matter threadbare and thought fit to leave the question of emoluments and allowances of the President of India to the Parliament and till any law is made by the Parliament, they shall be the same as enjoyed by the Governor-General of India immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. It is also seen that there was no limitation with regard to the allowances and privileges to which the Governor-General was entitled. As seen from the budget estimate of 1949-1950, provisions were made for Rs. 6,64,000/- per annum apart from the salary of the Governor-General. There was no provision that the Governor-General of India had to pay for the use of Government vehicles or Government conveyance. As stated earlier the language employed in S. 7 of the Government of India Act and paragraph 2 of the Third Schedule to the said Act shows that the Governor-General was entitled to such allowances for expenses in respect of equipment and travelling so as to enable him to discharge conveniently and with dignity the duties of his office. As stated earlier the language employed in S. 7 of the Government of India Act and paragraph 2 of the Third Schedule to the said Act shows that the Governor-General was entitled to such allowances for expenses in respect of equipment and travelling so as to enable him to discharge conveniently and with dignity the duties of his office. The President of India is also entitled to such allowances and privileges that would enable him to conveniently and with dignity discharge the duties of his office. If the President is to travel like any other citizen of India for his personal purposes and pay out of his own pocket for the same, he will not certainly be in a position to conveniently discharge the duties of his office and with dignity. Even the petitioner refers in his affidavit to the oath taken by the President at the time of assuming office under Article 60 of the Constitution. As per the said oath, the President shall devote himself to the service and well-being of the people of India. Hence he is always to be ready to respond to any emergency call at any moment to perform his duty as the President of India and tackle the situation as provided in the Constitution of India. There is no provision in the Constitution of India enabling the President of India to go on leave. Nor is there any specific provision for payment of leave travel concession or such allowances which even the lowest official in the Government is entitled to get. The President of India is the Head of the State during every minute of the term of his office whether he is on a tour for personal purposes or in his residence attending to any of his personal matters. He cannot, therefore, be placed on the same pedestal as any other citizen of India. The provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India are in no way violated by the Government providing conveyance to the President of India to meet his personal needs also. If the argument of the petitioner is accepted, only multi-millionaries can aspire for the post of the President of India, or only a Sanyasi who has already renounced the world can become the President of India. 17. If the argument of the petitioner is accepted, only multi-millionaries can aspire for the post of the President of India, or only a Sanyasi who has already renounced the world can become the President of India. 17. There is no substance in the contention that if the President of India incurs expenditure for his personal purposes, and that too for meeting a religious Head, it would be against the oath taken by him. That will not in any way detract his devotion to service or well-being of the people of India. 18. Nor is there any substance in the contention that the Constitution is secular in character and the President of India shall not visit any religious Head and charge the exchequer therefor. This Court had occasion to consider the meaning of the word ‘secular’ as used in the Constitution of India in Dravidar Kazhakam represented by the General Secretary, K. Veeramani v. The Chairman United India Insurance Company Ltd. 1992-1-L.W. 1. It is pointed out in that case that secularism does not mean irreligion or anything anti-religious and it means only religious tolerance. It is also observed that in so far as the State is concerned, secularism implies that the State does not identify itself with any particular Religion. Until the Parliament enacts a law on the subject, the President of India is entitled to all the allowances and privileges enjoyed by the Governor-General of the Dominion of India. I have no doubt that the Governor-General had the privilege of going to any part of the country for any purpose, personal or official and the use of Government conveyance without payment of rent or hire. Hence, the second respondent is not bound to reimburse any amount-spent by the first respondent for the visits of the second respondent to Kancheepuram Mutt. 19. There is no merit in the writ petition and it is dismissed.