The Indian Constitution has ensured the independence of the judiciary through a number of measures. The legislature is not involved in the process of appointment of judges. Thus, it was believed that party politics would not play a role in the process of appointments. In order to be appointed as a judge, a person must have experience as a lawyer and/or must be well versed in law. Political opinions of the person or his/her political loyalty should not be the criteria for appointments to judiciary. The judges have a fixed tenure. They hold office till reaching the age of retirement. Only in exceptional cases, judges may be removed. But they have security of tenure. Security of tenure ensures that judges could function without fear or favors. The Constitution prescribes a very difficult procedure for removal of judges. The Constitution makers believed that a difficult procedure of removal would provide security of office to the members of judiciary. The judiciary is not financially dependent on either the executive or legislature. The Constitution provides that the salaries and allowances of the judges are not subjected to the approval of the legislature. The actions and decisions of the judges are immune from personal criticisms. The judiciary has the power to penalize those who are found guilty of contempt of court. This authority of the court is seen as an effective protection to the judges from unfair criticism. Parliament cannot discuss the conduct of the judges except when the proceeding to remove a judge is being carried out. This gives the judiciary independence to adjudicate without fear of being criticized. The appointment of judges has never been free from political controversy. It is part of the political process. The judiciary has the power to penalize those who are found guilty of contempt of court. This authority of the court is seen as an effective protection to the judges from unfair criticism. Parliament cannot discuss the conduct of the judges except when the leaders of the freedom movement had realized the importance of rights and demanded that the British rulers should respect rights of the people. The Motilal Nehru committee had demanded a bill of rights as far back as in 1928. It was therefore, natural that when India became independent and the Constitution was being prepared, there were no two opinions on the inclusion and protection of rights in the Constitution. The Constitution listed the rights that would be specially protected and called them fundamental rights?. The word fundamental suggests that these rights are so important that the Constitution has separately listed them and made special provisions for their protection. The Fundamental Rights are so important that the Constitution itself ensures that they are not violated by the government. Fundamental Rights are different from other rights available to us. While ordinary legal rights are protected and enforced by ordinary law, Fundamental Rights are protected and guaranteed by the constitution of the country. Ordinary rights may be changed by the legislature by ordinary process of law making, but a fundamental right may only be changed by amending the Constitution itself. Besides this, no organ of the government can act in a manner that violates them. As we shall study below in this chapter, judiciary has the powers and responsibility to protect the fundamental rights from violations by actions of the government. Executive as well as legislative actions can be declared illegal by the judiciary if these violate the fundamental rights or restrict them in an unreasonable manner. Fundamental rights are not absolute or unlimited rights. Government can put reasonable restrictions on the exercise of our fundamental rights. It is estimated that leather industry will require at least one millions additional man power in the next five years. The skill gaps at the level of designers, technologists and management professionals are more stark and demanding.