Vol. 13 · pages 651–655

618 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Shri H. V. Kamath : Will it not be better to specify certain articles in the Constitution with regard to discretionary powers, instead of conferring general discretionary powers like this ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I said so, that I would very readily do it. I am prepared to introduce specific articles, if I knew what are the articles which the House is going to incorporate in the Constitution regarding vesting of the discretionary powers in the Governor. Shri H. V. Kamath : Why not hold it over ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : We can revise. This House is perfectly competent to revise article 143. If after going through the whole of it, the House feels that the better way would be to mention the articles specifically, it can do so. It is purely a logomachy. [Two amendments were rejected. Article 143 was added to the Constitution.] ***** ARTICLE 144 The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That fur clause (1) of article 144, the following be substituted .— “144. (1) The Chief Minister shall he appointed by the Governor and the other ministers shall be appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister and the ministers shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor”. Provided that in the States of Bihar. Central Provinces and Berar and Orissa there shall be a minister in charge of tribal welfare who may in addition be in charge of welfare of the Scheduled Castes and Backward classes or any other work. (la) The Council shall be collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly of the state’.” Shri T. T. Krishnamachari : May I suggest that the Honourable Dr. Ambedkar might vary the wording in clause (la) of article 144 by the addition of the words “Of ministers “to the words “The Council” ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That is all right. It will bring it into line with article 62. I move that amendment. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : May I know what is the method for the appointment of that particular Minister for Bihar and other places ? Whether the minister will be appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister—that is clear certainly, because you say “Provided” and this means that whatever we have said before will not apply in the case of these ministers. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : What it says is among the ministers appointed under clause (1) which means they are appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister, one minister will be in charge of this portfolio. * CAD, Vol. VIII, 1st June 1949, p. 503

619DRAFT CONSTITUTION ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. President, I beg to move: “That in clause (4) of article 144, for the words ‘In choosing his ministers and in his relations with them’ the words ‘In the choice of his ministers and in the exercise of his other functions under the Constitution’ be substituted.” Sir, this is nothing but a verbal amendment. ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move: “That clause ( 6) of article 144 he omitted.” Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : Why ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Because we do not want to give more discretionary powers than has been defined in certain articles, we are trying to meet you. ‡Shri Jaspat Roy Kapoor : If any member has any technical objection it is another matter but this is an amendment which is acceptable to Dr. Ambedkar and most other Members whom I have consulted. There seems to be no harm in permission being given to this. If Dr. Deshmukh is opposed to this amendment, of course he will have his say on the merits of it, and he will have an opportunity to convince the house to reject it. Mr. President: Would that not open up discussion again ? Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : Yes. If Dr. Ambedkar is prepared to accept it, there is another way out of it. The proviso could be separately put and if it is defeated, it will be deleted. Mr. President: Yes, that is a way out. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am not accepting the omission of the proviso but I am quite prepared to have the proviso transferred from this article to the Instrument of Instructions. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : May I propose that this article be held over ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Why, after having debated so long ? Mr. President : The question is whether it should stand here or it should be transferred to the Instrument of Instructions.... ***** * CAD, Vol. VIII, 1st June 1949, p. 506. † Ibid p. 507. ‡ Ibid p. 519.

620 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES *Mr. President: ...Dr. Ambedkar. *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. President, in the course of tills debate on the various amendments moved I have noticed that there are only lour points which call for a reply. The first point raised in the debate is that instead of the provision that the Ministers shall hold office during pleasure it is desired that provision should be made that they shall hold office while they have the confidence of the majority of the House. Now, I have no doubt about it that it is the intention of this Constitution that the Ministry shall hold office during such time as it holds the confidence of the majority. It is on that principle that the Constitution will work. The reason why we have not so expressly stated it is because it has not been slated in that fashion or in those terms in any of the Constitutions which lay down a parliamentary system of Government. ‘During pleasure’ is always understood lo mean that the ‘pleasure’ shall not continue notwithstanding the fact that the Ministry has lost the confidence of the majority. The moment the Ministry has lost the confidence of the majority it is presumed that the President will exercise his ‘pleasure’ in dismissing the Ministry and therefore it is unneccessary to differ from what I may say the stereotyped phraseology which is used in all responsible governments. The amendment of my Friend Prof. Saksena, substituting the words “Lower House” I am afraid, cannot be accepted, because under the provisions of the Constitution, it is open to the Prime Minister not only to select his Ministers from the Lower, but also from the Upper House. It is not the scheme that the Minister shall be taken only from the Lower House and not from (he Upper House. Consequently the provision that the Minister shall be appointed for six months, although he is not elected must be MO extensive as to cover both cases, and for that reason I am unable to accept his amendment. The third amendment which has been considerably debated was moved by my Friend Mr. Kamath and Prof. Shah. With minor amendments, they are more or less of the same tenor. In that connection, what I would like to say is tills, that the House will recall that amendment No. 1332 to article 62, which is a provision analogous to article 144, was moved by Prof. Shah and was debated at considerable * CAD, Vol. VIII, 1st June 1949, p. 520-21. †Ibid p.p. 520-21.

621DRAFT CONSTITUTION length. On that occasion I expressed what views I held on the subject, and it seems to me, therefore, quite unnecessary to add anything to what I have said on that occasion. Shri H. V. Kamath : My honourable Friend Dr. Ambedkar did not accept the amendment on that occasion because in his view it was not comprehensive enough. Now it is more comprehensive. Mr. President : You have already said all that. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The fourth point is the one which have been raised by my Friend Mr. Jaipal Singh, and to some extent by Mr. Rohini Kumar Chaudhuri. The reason why this particular clause came to be introduced in the Draft Constitution is to be found in the recommendations of the sub-committee on tribal people appointed by the Minorities Committee of the Constituent Assembly. In the report made by that committee, it will be noticed that there is an Appendix to it which is called “Statutory Recommendation”. The proviso which has been introduced in this article is the verbatim reproduction of the suggestion and the recommendation made by this particular committee. It is said there, that in the Provinces of Bihar, Central Provinces and Berar and Orissa, there shall be a separate Minister for tribal welfare, provided the Minister may hold charge simultaneoulsy of welfare work pertaining to Schedule Castes and backward classes or any other work. Therefore, the Drafting Committee had no choice except to introduce this proviso because it was contained in that part of the report of the Tribal Committee which was headed “Statutory Recommendation”. It was the intention of this committee that this provision should appear in the Constitution itself, that it should not be relegated to any other part of it. That is why this has come from the Drafting Committee and it merely follows the recommendation of the other Committee. With regard to the suggestion of my Friend Mr. Jaipal Singh, that Bombay should be included on account of the fact that as a result of the mergers that have taken place into the Bombay Presidency, the number of tribal people has increased. I am sorry to say that at this stage, I cannot accept it because this is a matter on which it would be necesssary to consult the Ministry of Bombay and unfortunately my Friend the Honourable Mr. Kher who was present in the Constitutent Assembly during the last few days is not here now, and I am therefore not able to accept this amendment.

622 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Shri H. V. Kamath : With reference to my amendment, may I know if Dr. Ambedkar has realised from the view that he expressed previously—if he has recanted ? Mr. President : I do not think that kind of cross-examination can be allowed. Now I shall take up the amendments. There are two amendments moved by Mr. Tahir and Mr. Mohd. Ismail Nos. 2174 and 2175 which relate to this article 144, clause (l). If Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment No. 2165 is carried, probably they will drop automatically. Therefore, I would put Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment to vote. [Dr. Ambedkar’s all amendments mentioned hereinbefore were adopted, rest were negatived. Article 144, as amended was added to the Constitution.] ARTICLE 145 ***** The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not think I need add anything to the debate that has taken place. All that I want to say is this : I am prepared to accept the amendment of Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad No. 2210. *Mr. President : Then I put Amendment No. 2210 which includes within itself 2211 also. [Following amendment of Naziruddin Ahmed was accepted by Dr. Ambedkar and the House.] “That for clauses (2) and (4) of article 145, the following be substituted :— ‘(3) The Advocate-General shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor, and shall receive such remuneration as the Governor may determine’.” [Article 145, as amended was added to the Constitution.] ARTICLE 146 ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Bombay : General) : Sir, I do not accept the amendment. Article 146 is only a logical consequence of article 130. Article 130 says that the executive power of the State shall be vested in the Governor. That being so, the only logical conclusion is that all expression of executive action must be in the name of the Governor as is provided for in article 146. In regard to the observations made by my Honourable Friend Prof. K. T. Shah that under the old regime, all executive action was expressed in the name of the Government of India, my reply is that that was due * CAD, Vol. VIII, 1st June 1949, p. 528 † Ibid, 2nd June 1949. P. 532