Vol. 15 · pages 801–805

782 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES I already referred to that portion of May’s Parliamentary Practice, expulsion of a Member or suspending him is an additional remedy because he is a Member of Parliament. Anybody inside or outside may commit a contemt of the House. Merely because he is a member we have more jurisdiction over him than over the other person. So far as the other person, that is the outsider, is concerned, in the very nature of things we cannot expel or suspend him because he is not a Member. Therefore, all the same, whether one is a Member or an outsider one may commit a contempt of the house. It is only so far as the remedy is concerned that in the altered circumstances that remedy may have to be altered. But we do not come out of the seizin of this motion that has been moved already. When it was originally quite in order. I do not think by a unilateral resignation or withdrawal from the house all the further proceedings can be terminated. Regarding the other matter I shall consider it at leisure. Whoever wanted to speak now, let him not be under the impression that I will not hear. It is not on the floor of the House that I need hear him. He may communicate his opinion to me. Pandit Maitra: On what ? We are not interested in the merits. Mr. Deputy Speaker: All the matters: when the resignation takes effect; merely because the Member resigns, when his conduct has been brought to the notice of the House, whether by his mere resignation this House loses its jurisdiction—when, particularly, it has jurisdiction even with respect to persons who are not Members of this House if they commit a contempt of the House. That is a point which hon. Members have to note. If a person committed contempt of the House outside, there is no question of resignation. The House will still not stultify itself but proceed against him. Whether the position is changed by mere resignation is a matter which we have to consider. At present I do not think it alters the position except in regard to the remedial portion, that is as to what remedy has to be applied.

783PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES *Khwaja Inait Ullah (Bihar): Is Mr. Mudgal now a Member of the house or not ? Mr. Deputy Speaker: That is exactly what we are deciding. My view was that he is no longer a Member. I am prepared to hear any arguments to show that he continues to be a Member, and therefore the operative portion also holds good. So far as the earlier portion is concerned, I have not seen any precedents to the contrary that once this House is seized of the matter of contempt, merely by a unilateral act of the other person, it will lose its jurisdiction. So far as the operative portion is concerned, if he has already resigned there is no question of expulsion. If he has not resigned the question of expulsion comes in. Therefore it is a narrow point as to how far the oprative portion can be passed by this house. I would like to hear the Hon. the Law Minister and also any other hon. Member who would like to speak on this matter. Dr. Ambedkar: So far, Sir, I have submitted that it will not be open to make the resignation valid by expunging certain portions, because under rule 176A the power to expunge is confined only to the proceedings and to the debates. The letter of resignation does not form part of the debate and proceedings. My second submission is of a totally different sort and it is this. When a question arises as to the propriety of a resignation, who is the authority to decide it ? My submission is that when any such question arises, the authority to decide it is the house itself. You will allow me, Sir, to refer to a speech which I delivered in the Constituent Assembly in this very question on an amendment moved by Mr. Kamath. I said that as a matter of fact the resignation is submitted to Parliament, because the purpose of resignation is to dissociate himself from the body, namely the Parliament to which he was elected. The Speaker or the Deputy Speaker is merely a channel of communication to the House. I said in the course of that debate that although theoretically the resignation is to the collective body of people called Parliament, it would *P. D., Vol. 14, Part II, 25th September 1951, pp. 3277-79

784 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES be quite impossible for any Member who wanted to resign to send his resignation to the 292 or 295 Members of the House. Therefore, so far as the channel of communicating his wishes that he wants to dissociate himself from Parliament is concerned, to that extent the Speaker is the person to whom the resignation is to be submitted. But if a question were to arise as to whether the resignation was in valid form or not, the matter I think has to be decided by the House itself. Pandit Maitra : Where is it provided in the Constitution ? Everything must be provided in the Constitution. Please do not forget that you have a written Constitution for this country. Dr. Ambedkar: Therefore, my submission is this. If certain portions of the resignation cannot be expunged and they must stand part of the letter, and a question is raised whether the letter of resignation in its original form is valid or not, I think it is the House which will be called upon to decide whether Mr. Mudgal’s resignation is valid or not. These are the two submissions that I wish to make with regard to the point, that Mr. Mudgal’s resignation is valid and has become effective so that the last portion of the motion moved by the Prime Minister has become infructuous. That is the relevancy of the whole thing. All that we have to consider is this : whether the last portion of the motion moved by the Hon. the Prime Minister has been made infructuous by reason of the resignation of Mr. Mudgal, because it would not be proper for the House to proceed to do something to which it cannot give any legal effect. My submission is this that in view of the fact that Mr. Mudgal’s resignation is not a valid resignation. Mr. Mudgal still continues to be a Member of the house and the last portion of the motion moved by the Hon. the prime Minister can be made effective so far as Mr. Mudgal is concerned. Mr. Deputy Speaker : We will assume an hon. member tenders his resignation—it is not the case of Mr. Mudgal— and subsequently after a few moments he writes another letter to the Chair saying that he wishes to withdraw it. Is there provision for withdrawal ? Can I allow him to sit and vote?

785PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Dr. Ambedkar: No: unless the first matter is disposed of. Pandit Maitra: Disposed of in this case simply means submission of the resignation to the Chairman or Speaker. Nothing else is contemplated in the Constitution. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Is there any form prescribed in the Constitution for the letter of resignation ? Dr. Ambedkar: I do not think there is.

786 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES (40) SELECT COMMITTEE MEETINGS *The Minister of Law (Dr. Ambedkar): I beg to report under sub-rule (3) of rule 65 that the Select Committee appointed by the House to consider the Notaries Bill has failed to meet successively on two days. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Hon. Minister has merely intimated the fact—it may be followed up by any concrete motion that he may make. Dr. Ambedkar: For the moment I merely propose to report as required by sub-rule (3) of rule 65. It is for the House to decide whether the house will discharge the Select Committee which has been appointed and proceed. Mr. Deputy Speaker : May I ask any hon. Member in the Select Committee to state what exactly is the position ? Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava (Punjab): I am one of the members of the Select Committee......... Dr. Ambedkar: I should like to say that I do not cast any aspersion on the members of the Select Committee for their failure to meet because I am very well aware that they are engaged in many other Select Committes which are also meeting simultaneously, but since the rule casts upon the chairman of the Select Committee the responsibility to report to this house I am making this formal motion to bring the matter to the notice of the House. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava: I was submitting that so far as this Select Committee is concerned, its meetings were held at such time that Members could not possibly attend them. We are Members of several Select Committees and we have to make a choice as to which Comittee to attend. Even yesterday, I had some amendments to move to this Financial *P. D., Vol. 14, Part II, 28th September 1951, pp. 2617-18.