Vol. 15 · pages 111–115

94 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES the object of the Bill is to free both categories of people,— Ministers of State or Deputy Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries or Parliamentary Under Secretaries, whether they are in the Centre or whether they are in a State—from this embargo. That is the reason why the words “under the Government of India or the Government of any State” have been brought in. Shri Kamath : What about the point I raised ? Dr. Ambedkar : I am coming to that. The question may arise that if you permit the holder of an office mentioned in clause 2, in a State, to stand for election for Parliament, then he would also be entitled to continue to be a Member of Parliament after he is elected, because the words are “for being chosen, and for being”. My friend will see that that difficulty will absolutely disappear automatically by a constitutional provision contained in Article 101, because as soon as a Minister of State or a Deputy Minister or a Parliamentary Secretary or a Parliamentary Under-Secretary from a State is elected to Parliament, he will have to make his choice whether he would continue to be a Member of Parliament or whether he would continue to be a Member of the State Legislature. Consequently, although the provision is worded in this manner, it certainly would not create any kind of difficulty which he perhaps has in mind. Shri Kamath : Under the Constitution, is it possible for the States or even for the Centre to have Ministers of State or Deputy Ministers who are not members of the Legislature concerned ? A Minister could be a Minister without being a Member of the Legislature, but so far as I can interpret the Constitution, a Minister of State or a Deputy Minister cannot hold that office without at the same time being a Member of the Legislature. Dr. Ambedkar: For six months he can. So far as that drafting aspect is concerned, I think I have made the matter quite clear.

95PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES My friend, Mr. Krishnamachari, has been writing me on the point which I made that I have spent a great deal of time in studying this matter last night. I am sure about it that my labours would have been considerably shortened if the paper to which he referred just now viz., the Parliamentary paper, had been available to me. As I said, when I went, the Library was closed. I think that either the Library was closed or my friend ran away with the paper and did not allow me an opportunity of studying the paper. With regard to the comment made by my friend, Mr. Kamath, that I slipped when I said that some portion of the Bill viz., relating to Parliamentary Secretary and so on was a new thing and not contained in the original Ordinance, I do not think there is any ground for him to complain or any necessity for me to apologise. I quite agree that if a Member makes a slip, states wrong facts and these facts have the result of either misdirecting the House or misguiding it, there would undoubtedly be ground for doing so, but it was just a slip. Everybody knows that and I do not think therefore, that that was something which required complaint or comment. I can say that I have a less perfect memory than my friend, Mr. Kamath, has. I do not think that there is any point that has been left out by me without being answered. Pandit Kunzru : Will the Hon. Minister tell us whether the Ministers of State belong to the Council of Ministers or not and whether they are appointed by the President. Dr. Ambedkar : My hon. Friend asked me that question before. He knows very well, I think, that the position inside the Ministry is never regulated by law. It is always regulated by convention. It is the privilege of the Prime Minister to select any person to be a member of the Cabinet, although he may not be specifically designated as a Minister. It would be perfectly open to him to say “In my cabinet, I will include only certain Ministers. I will not include other Ministers but I would also include a Secretary of State or a Minister of State”. The internal arrangement of the Cabinet has always been, as the hon. Member knows, a matter of convention. If he wants I can state the position as it exists now but he must

96 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES understand that that is only for the time being. The present Prime Minister may after the method of working of the Cabinet or if a successor comes he may also adopt a different arrangement. There is therefore, no use........... Pandit Kunzru : May I interrupt my hon. friend ? Does he take the phrase “Council of Ministers” to be synonymous with the Cabinet ? Dr. Ambedkar : I do not. As I said in my opening speech this morning this is a phrase which is capable of double interpretation. I have seen observations by writers on Constitutional Law, where they have stated that even Parliamentary Secretaries or Parliamentary Under-Secretaries are included in the term Minister. There are also other writers who maintain that ‘Minister’ is a narrower term. Therefore, as I said, it is very difficult to satisfy anybody or give a correct answer. This is a fluid situation and must remain fluid : that is the important part. There is no use pinning me down to give my hon. Friend a clear picture of how the Ministers and the Parliamentary Secretaries, all of them stand together vis-a-vis each other. Pandit Kunzru : I am sorry I have failed to make myself understood. I am not criticising my hon. Friend. All that I am seeking to know is this. If the Council of Ministers does not mean the same thing as a Cabinet, then obviously it can be a wider body than the Cabinet....... Dr. Ambedkar : Yes. Pandit Kunzru : ............ and the Ministers of State and the Deputy Ministers can belong to it. No question therefore, arises with regard to their position. Dr. Ambedkar : I need not dilate upon this. The hon. Prime Minister in a most authoritative statement said that in his opinion the Council of Ministers included everybody. Shri T. Husain (Bihar): I want to ask one question. It is clear under the Constitution that a Minister can be a Minister for six months without being a Member of Parliament. That is mentioned in the Constitution itself. There is no such mention about the Minister of State or the Deputy Minister,

97PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES or the Parliamentary Secretary or the Parliamentary Under secretary. The Hon. the Law Minister told us just now that according to his reading of the Bill a Minister of State, a Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Secretary or Parliamentary under-Secretary can hold office for six months without being a Member of Parliament. I have read the Bill again and I do not understand how the Hon. Minister came to this conclusion. Would he explain ? Mr. Deputy Speaker : It is not absolutely germane to this Bill. The hon. Member may look into the matter at leisure. Dr. Deshmukh: Sir, one point may be made clear, which is on a matter of fact, viz., whether Deputy Ministers are appointed by the President. This is a matter of concrete fact and probably the Hon. Minister may be able to reply. Mr. Deputy Speaker : How is it necessary in this connection ? Dr. Ambedkar : Surely, they are appointed by the President : who else call appoint ? Mr. Deputy Speaker : The question is : “That the Bill to make provision in regard to certain offices of profit under Article 102 of the Constitution, be taken into consideration.” The motion was adopted. *Shri Tyagi : I beg to move: “That in the heading of clause 1, after the words ‘Short title’, the words ‘ and commencement’ be inserted.” It is a very simple amendment and I hope the Doctor will accept it. Dr. Ambedkar : Perhaps what my friend Mr. Tyagi has noted is that there is no clause stating the commencement. Generally a Bill has a clause saying that the Bill comes into operation from such and such a date. This clause does not exist here, and he thinks there is a lacuna which ought to be filled. But may I submit that under the General Clauses *P.D., Vol. 2, part II, 10th March 1950, p. 1365.

98 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Act, where a Bill does not contain such a clause it is presumed that it comes into operation immediately after the signature of the President. Mr. Deputy Speaker : He wants to push the date to 26th January, 1950. Dr. Ambedkar : It is unnecessary so long as the Ordinance is there.