Library › Vol. 15

Vol. 15 · pages 101–105

As Free India's First Law Minister and Member of Opposition in Parliament, 1947–1956

This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.

PDF page 101 (printed page 84)

Open the original page

84 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Clause (2) says : “Before giving any decision on any such question, the President shall obtain the opinion of the Election Commission and shall act according to such opinion.” Mr. Deputy Speaker: No such question has been referred to the President. Shri Tyagi : rose— Dr. Ambedkar: Sir, I cannot answer to all these petty questions which have no bearing on the question. My friend, Mr. Sidhva, had suggested to the House that any number of people could go to the High Court or the Supreme Court and obtain a decision. That procedure is barred under the Constitution. That matter is left entirely to the President. Now, I come to the other question which Mr. Sidhva very pointedly raised as to what would happen to Members of Parliament who have been appointed to various Committees. Would they incur disqualification or would they not incur disqualification ? Now, I have here before me an analysis of the various types of Committees on which Members might be invited to serve and where they might get some sort of remuneration or fee or something. The first is this : Membership of Committees or Commissions constituted by a resolution of Parliament or under rules made by Parliament, for instance, the Public Accounts Committee, the Estimates Committee, the Standing Committees attached to various Ministries etc. There might be various others, but the substantial point is that Committees are appointed by a resolution of Parliament or under the rules made by Parliament. I speak of course without any kind of dogmatism but I do not feel any doubt that the membership of any such committee would involve any disqualification, for the simple reason that the appointment is made by Parliament either by rules relating to any particular committee or generally by rules framed for the constitution of committees. The second class of membership relates to all corporate bodies constituted by an Act of Parliament, such as, for instance, where an Act provides for the election of Members by Parliament either from among its Members or from

PDF page 102 (printed page 85)

Open the original page

85PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES outsiders, for example the Indian Oilseeds Committee, the Indian Nursing Council, the Employees State Insurance Corporation or the Central Silk Board. Under the same category are also cases where such Members are appointed by the Central Government, such as, for instance, the Coal Mines Stowing Board, the Delhi Transport Authority and so on. I am only expressing here my tentative conclusions and it seems to me that under the first category where Parliament provides for the election to certain statutory bodies that could not be regarded as an appointment by Government and therefore membership of a committee like that, in my judgment, would not involve any disqualification. But with regard to the second category where such Members are appointed by the Central Government I feel a certain amount of doubt. I think that that probably might involve a certain disqualification, for the simple reason that although the bodies to which appointments are made are statutory bodies created by a law enacted by Parliament, yet the appointment is by Government. Therefore, that is one element to be taken into consideration in deciding whether the possible consequence may not be disqualification. It is possible to make a further distinction, namely, that a Member of Parliament appointed by Government to a statutory body such as under the Coal Mines Safety (Stowing) Act or the Delhi Transport Authority may be paid out of the funds belonging to that particular authority and not from funds belonging to Government; whether that would be a possible basis for distinction I have my doubts. I personally think that that would involve disqualification, because it may be regarded and interpreted as a fraud upon the Statute, by getting a Member of Parliament to be appointed but to be paid by somebody else. I think that is a case which must be excluded ............... Shri T. T. Krishnamachari (Madras): It is not considered as falling into that Category. Dr. Ambedkar: I do not know. My friend Mr. T.T. Krishnamachari will allow me to say that I have not slept the whole of last night. I have been reading Halsbury and a number of other books, as the subject is so complicated. Anson’s is the only book I have which could give some guidance

PDF page 103 (printed page 86)

Open the original page

86 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES and I shall pass it on to him. It was published in 1922 and probably it gives the best assistance in this matter. My hon. Friend will have his right to speak and here I am only expressing my tentative conclusion. Shri Kamath : The Hon. Minister will have good sleep to night. Shrimati Durgabai (Madras): What is the position in regard to the All-India Nursing Council constituted under an Act of Parliament ? Dr. Ambedkar : Probably that would not involve any disqualification. Now I come to membership of Advisory Councils or committees constituted under an Act of Parliament or appointed by a statutory corporation. Take for instance the Damodar Valley Corporation. As I said, I am not certain about it also. (Interruption) I am not advising any particular client. I am very sorry to say that, I am making a general statement. If the hon. lady is interested in the Nursing Council she had better go to a lawyer and obtain his advice. Shri Sidhva : That is not fair. Shrimati Durgabai : You said that Coal Mines Safety (Stowing) Act does not come under the disqualification ............ Dr. Ambedkar : I looked it up overnight and found out what the provisions were. Then I come to membership of committees, Commissions or Councils or other similar bodies constituted by Government for specific purposes by resolution or order, for instance, membership of the Governing Body of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, membership of the Fiscal Commission, membership of the Government Trading Enquiry Committee (Interruption) I do not want to hide anything—membership of the Special Recruitment Board, representatives or delegates to United Nations Organisation or any international conference or association. I feel rather doubtful about membership of committees, commissions or councils or other similar bodies constituted by Government for a specified purpose by resolution or by order.

PDF page 104 (printed page 87)

Open the original page

87PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES As I have stated my view is that in certain cases Members of Parliament would not be affected. In certain cases they might be affected. As my friend Prof. Ranga said—and I whole heartedly agree with him—this question of disqualification by reason of holding an office of profit is one of the most important matters. It has been and could be a tremendous influence for corruption and therefore we have to proceed very carefully in this matter. In England I do not know what they do but I have found that they have no general law as such. Whenever they make a law under which they create a particular office, in that very Act they provide whether the holder of that office shall be deemed to be disqualified for being a Member of Parliament, so that no general theory is there. Each case is dealt with particularly and Anson’s Vol. I gives quite a long list. There every Act is mentioned and the office it has created and whether the holder of that office under the particular Act shall continue . to be a Member of Parliament or not. I am afraid we have therefore to be very cautious. One thing I am prepared to admit, namely, that those Members who are already holding office, which, as I said, might lead to disqualification, if they have to give up their offices immediately, administrative difficulties might be created. The work might be held up and it might be possible and even desirable to have a short measure removing the disqualification from the holders of those offices for the present, so that we would get sufficient time later on to consider what general principles we should adopt. If there is a certain amount of delay in carrying out the suggestion which I have made, we can rectify it by passing an Indemnity Act, giving it retrospective effect, so that all those who are holding offices today need not be in danger of incurring any such disqualification. I do not think that we can really rush into this matter and have a general clause exempting anybody and everybody without either proper consideration or examination. I admit that if the disqualification applied without any qualification to Members who are working on various committees, some difficulties might be created. If the House so desires I would be quite prepared to consider a small measure of one clause and bring it before the House to give it retrospective effect and also to add to it an indemnity clause,

PDF page 105 (printed page 88)

Open the original page

88 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES so that if there is any lacuna in the legal position a Member will not be deemed to have vacated his seat. More than that I am afraid I cannot do at this stage. With regard to the omission of part-time offices from the Bill I think the reply that I have given, namely, that you have to be very cautious in extending the principle of exemption to holders of office, applies to them also. I may say that the original clause in the Ordinance was taken from the wartime Ordinance which was Ordinance LII of 1942. My friend Mr. Kamath will realize that it is perfectly legitimate to widen the principle in an emergency when there are so many offices to be filled and the number of men available is so few that we have necessarily to go to Parliament to pick up Members to officiate on those occasions. But what is necessary in wartime and in an emergency should not be applied in normal times. That was the consideration which prevailed upon me in deleting the clause which originally found its place in the Ordinance. Shri Kamath : Was it not the Law Ministry itself which drafted the Ordinance ? Dr. Ambedkar : The Law Ministry can forget and also be forgiven. The Law Minister is not omniscient. I live to learn, and if I can learn from my friend Mr. Kamath I shall be only too grateful. This is all that I have to say. Shri Kamath : rose — Mr. Deputy Speaker : We have only three minutes to adjourn for Lunch. I hope the hon. Member would not take more than three minutes. Shri Kamath : There are some legal and constitutional points which I have to make and I will take more than three minutes. At the outset may I make it clear that in my judgment— I have learnt a lot from Dr. Ambedkar during Constitution making and I have much more to learn from him ; I wish to reciprocate the compliment—there is no need to rush or hustle this Bill through, because even if this Bill were passed by this House before this midnight, that is, of the 10th, it will