Monday, the 13th December, 1948

Prof. K. T. Shah: Mr. Vice-President, Sir, I had tabledan amendment on this clause suggesting its entire deletionwhich obviously was out of order, and has, therefore, beenruled out. My object in submitting that amendment however, was to point out that the whole article setsup a machinery, not only very complicated and likely to giverise to serious disputes as regards the actual number ofvotes which a State may be entitled to, but which will fail,I submit, in the original purpose for which proportionalrepresentation by single transferable vote was devised.Proportional representation by single transferable vote isintended, I submit, to reflect in the legislative body allthe shades of political philosophy, all the differentinterests, all the different opinions that may be found in acountry, provided they can muster a given figure, say,50,000 or 100,000, or whatever may be supposed to be thefigure, which is entitled to have its voice heard in the legislative or similar large bodies. Proportionalrepresentation, therefore, is not suited, I submit, wherethe election is of the executive head, and where, after alla single individual is to be elected. I agree that you canwork it on a proportional basis by having severalcandidates, and the votes of the different candidates aretransferred from one to another according to the order ofpreference. That, however, will bring you something to thiseffect, that your finally elected President was the chosenrepresentative, in the first degree, of let us say one-third: that he was the chosen representative in the seconddegree about one-tenth, that he was the chosenrepresentative in the third degree--supposing there arethree candidates--of one twentieth. This is a minorityrepresentative not of a majority.

I have had some experience of ProportionalRepresentation in the University of Bombay, and I have knownthat preferences as low as nine, ten, twelve and fifteenhave actually been counted. Do you wish your President to beelected by transfers so that the fifteenth choice of a groupmay eventually succeed and he would eventually be elected?He would not be the representative even of a majority in thefirst degree--he would be the representative of a majorityby a number of transfers, so that in the first degree he mayactually be the representative of a minority. This isundesirable in the interests of national solidarity.

A properly organised minority may secure a sufficientnumber of votes for the individual or the candidate to stayon, until by transfer, retransfer and re-retransfer hefinally secures an absolute majority. That majority will bea misleading and a highly ambiguous majority, in which themajor portion of the country will not be reflected.

I further feel that the machinery necessary fortransfer and retransfer of anybody who gets last on theroll, so to say, of the list of candidates above will beitself causing difficulties, compared to which thedifficulties urged on a previous occasion by the mere forceof numbers does not appear to me to be so great. The latterdifficulty seems to me to be needlessly exaggerated--that200 million, voters voting will make the electionimpossible. The 200 million voters will not all be voting atone place and at one time. That is physically impossible.But 200 million voters scattered, let us say, in 20,000centres and each centre voting its proportion of voters. isnot at all a difficult thing which would rise to the levelof an impossibility. We can, therefore, rule out completelythe question of actual popular representation in the choiceof the head of the State as impossible. Nor is theadministrative machinery in my mind so difficult to provide.If only you look back to the history of representativeinstitutions in this country, at the Centre, or in theProvinces, from only about thirty or forty years ago youwill find that the electorate has, at each change, jumpedeight or ten or twenty times; and that those who had heldthat the mere size of the electorate would make itimpossible

to work it have proved false prophets.

Take the last rise in the electorate form a few hundredthousands rising, to about 35 millions, a rise of some 100times. And if a suggestion like the one I had the honour toput before the House was accepted, you would raise it onlybe seven or eight times. That would not be a insurmountabledifficulty.

In any case the difficulty created by the system ofProportional Representation, and the reflection that thePresident actually may not be the choice in the first degreeof a majority, would undermine the very basis of respect andreverence that the Head of the State should command.

I suggest, therefore, that the system of ProportionalRepresentation, apart from the other difficulties that havebeen put before the House by those who have movedamendments, should itself convince the House that it is avery dangerous--not to say vicious--principle, and as suchought to be disregarded.

By all means have it, if you like, in the compositionof your Legislature. By all means have it, if you like, in the composition of other similar bodies. But when you selectthe head of the State, or of any unit within the Union, youshould avoid the principle of Proportional Representation,as it is a double-edged sword that may cut both ways. It mayrepresent all shades of opinion; at the same time it maybring to the head of affairs a man who is a representativein the first degree, only of a minority.

On these grounds I support the amendment that theprinciple of proportionate representation be deleted andthat the article be amended accordingly.

Shri A. V. Thakkar (United States of Kathiawar:Saurashtra). Mr. Vice-President, Sir, I do not propose tospeak on the question of proportional representation but onanother point regarding the `last preceding census'. As iswell known, since the census of 1941 was taken there havebeen very great changes in the population of the country,particularly in certain Provinces. I would refer to theProvinces of East Punjab and West Bengal. I would also referto the small changes in the United Provinces and Bombay.There large numbers of Hindus and Sikhs and other populationhave come in and added largely to the general population inthose four Provinces. At the same time a large number ofMuslims have left these four Provinces and gone to Pakistan.Therefore the census of 1941 has been made thoroughlyunrepresentative of the numbers of people residing in thesefour Provinces. I would suggest that the last precedingcensus, namely the one of 1941, has very little value,looking at it from a commonsense point of view. Governmentmay therefore arrange to have either a new census taken for the whole country specially for the purpose of thisConstitution or necessary arrangements may be made early fortaking the new census of these 4 Provinces. It may besuggested that the census of 1951 may be advanced by oneyear, say, it may be taken in the year 1950 instead of in1951. Or a special census may be taken only for these fourProvinces which I have mentioned and the number of seatsrepresenting the population of those Provinces be determinedtherefrom. Unless this is done it will be very unfair tocertain communities. I will name only one instance.

I will give the instance of the Scheduled Castes of thePunjab. Large numbers of these people residing in WestPunjab have come over to East Punjab and their number has inconsequence very much increased. The number of seats that the Scheduled Castes will get--specially reserved for them--will be much fewer, being nearly one-half of what they areentitled to get under the existing population of thesecastes. The same thing applies to the Scheduled Castes ofWest Bengal also, though to a smaller extent. In East Punjabthe difficulty is a very serious one. Therefore thisminority would not get half its due representation if thefigures of the preceding census were adopted.

Shri Rohini Kumar Chaudhari (Assam: General): *[Mr.Vice-President, on this last day of the fourth session, butnot at the very closing period, of this Constituent AssemblyI desire to speak in

Hindi in this House. I have come toentertain this desire as a result of the visit I made a fewdays ago to the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan which was meetingunder the Presidentship of Seth Govind


* [] Translation of Hindustani speech.

Das. My friend Shri Prakasam made a speech in Hindi in theSammelan, and it was such as to make him known for hiscourage in every part of the country. Indeed his speech wasso very sweet and fine as to cause the spread of his fame asa man of courage in all parts of the world. It made mereflect that if Shri Prakasam, a resident of the Deccan,could make such a fine speech in Hindi there was no reasonwhy I could not do so........]

Mr. Vice-President: Are you speaking on article 44 orany other matter?

Shri Rohini Kumar Chaudhari:* [And I concluded that Icould not fail in my attempt to speak in Hindi simplybecause I am an Assamese.] Sir, I have exhausted my Hindi.

Mr. Vice-President: You will kindly make better use ofyour time.

Shri Rohini Kumar Chaudhari: My honourable Friend Mr.Thakkar Bapa, in the course of his speech, referred to theUnited Provinces and the Punjab. Very naturally he hasforgotten Assam--In Assam, in 1941 the war was almost at thedoor and the census was taken in a very haphazard manner.Therefore it is all the more necessary for the province ofAssam to have this amendment, which will allow us to takeinto consideration the relevant figures which may be arrivedat just before the election, adopted. If we can have acensus which will show the figures of different provinces asthey now stand for the purpose of preparing the electoralrolls it will be of very great advantage. Take the case ofAssam. Even the actual numbers of people who have come in asrefugees to Assam from East Bengal have not yet been taken.We surmise that some 3 or 4 lakhs of people have thus cometo Assam already. Therefore it is necessary that thesefigures should be taken into consideration at the time offixing the total number of members for the provinces. Atpresent, the population of Assam minus the district ofSylhet has been taken; but many from Eastern Bengal and fromSylhet have come to Assam and their figures must be takeninto consideration in fixing the total number of seats for the province. This should be done also for fixing the numberof seats in the electorates. Therefore I commend to thisHouse the acceptance of the suggestion that the latestcensus figures may be taken into consideration at the timeof delimiting the constituencies.

Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra: Mr. Vice-President, Sir,article 44 with which we are dealing now provides that asfar as practicable there shall be uniformity in the scale ofrepresentation based on population of the different Statesat the time of the election of the President. It will thusbe seen that this article, innocuous as it seems,constitutes the very backbone of the working of thisConstitution. This article incidentally provides for themechanism of representation in the different legislaturesconstituting the units of the Indian Union. The framers ofthis draft Constitution have come to the conclusion that they should try to bring about a workable uniformity in therepresentation that is going to be given to the differentStates. Now, in the Explanation of this article, it has beenprovided that `population' in this article means, thepopulation as ascertained at the last preceding census. Tothis, Sir, an amendment has been moved by my friend Mr.Naziruddin Ahmad which runs as follows: "The latest censusof which the relevant figures have been published." Thesewords are to be put in place of the words `the lastpreceding census'. I understand that this amendment is goingto be accepted by the honourable Chairman of the DraftingCommittee which for all practical purposes means that itwill be accepted by the House. Personally speaking I do notsee how this amendment at all improves the position. In myopinion it makes the position worse. Sir, anybody withcommonsense can understand what `the preceding census'means, but few can appreciate what

is meant by `the latestcensus of which the relevant figures have been published'.


* [] Translation of Hindustani speech.

Sir, nobody knows, after a census has taken place, whenthe figures thereof are going to be published. It might beone year, two years or three or four years. When an electiontakes place, it is quite possible, I should rather sayprobable--that at that particular point of time thepreceding census will not give you the relevant figuresbecause it takes a lot of time to publish them. I thereforedo not see how this amendment is going to improve theposition. Unless the executive government--for a census isafter all the function of the executive government and isconducted under orders of the executive government--takesproper steps to see that the publication of figures followsimmediately the enumeration, I believe that the safeguardthat is sought to be provided by way of giving uniformity ofrepresentation is going to be in a very large measuredefeated. I want this aspect to be carefully considered. it is not as simple as we think.

Let us see how it will operate to the prejudice ofcertain provinces, apart from the question that enumerationand publication will not follow simultaneously and there isbound to elapse an interval of a pretty long time. Sir, wehad the last census in 1941. I wish that my honourableFriend, Mr. Rohini Kumar Chaudhary from Assam, who startedspeaking in Hindi but broke down and started again inEnglish, could make his point clear by making a straightspeech in English. He had a point to make whichunfortunately he could not. There is a very important pointinvolved in this. In provinces like Assam, undivided Bengal,undivided Punjab, Sind and the North-West Frontier Province,where there was a preponderant body of Muslim population,there was at the time of the last census of 1941, acompetitive race for increasing the numbers, and in theseprovinces that I have mentioned, except in Assam--I am notquite sure of Assam even though in Assam also a MuslimLeague Government was in power--it is a fact thatcommunities developed a pathological interest in enhancingtheir numbers so as to get the maximum benefit in the nextsucceeding Constitutional Reforms. I cannot talk of otherprovinces because the Muslim community there was in aminority and no Muslim League Government was in power. Sofar as the provinces, I have mentioned, are concerned, I cansay from my personal knowledge and experience--and I thinkMembers from these provinces will testify to the same fact--that this was the state of affairs. The Census Commissioneralso made an observation to that effect. Therefore, if todaythe census figures of 1941 are going to be any guide forfixing the number of seats in the particular provinces I have mentioned, we will get a very misleading picture of thepopulation of these provinces indeed. Mind you, in undividedBengal for more than ten years before partition, the Hinducommunity had absolutely no voice, had nothing to do with the Government or any of its departments. In any case, theywere not in any important position and the dice were heavilyloaded against them. Hence we clamoured then and I domaintain even now that the figures of 1941 are in no way anyindex to the real population of these provinces. Now, afterthe 15th August 1947, some of these provinces were divided.Bengal was divided; West Bengal came within the IndianUnion. East Punjab came into the Indian Union. Assam wasdivided and a portion was retained by Assam and a portionwent to Pakistan. Sind and the Frontier in toto went over toPakistan. Thereafter followed the terrible upheavals whicheverybody knows, as a result of which East Punjab came to bedenuded of all Muslims and the West Punjab of all Hindus.The course of events compelled us to change the scale ofrepresentation for East Punjab and West Bengal in thepresent Constituent Assembly. Today the position is that youdo not know if there is any Muslim soul in East Punjab orwhether there is any Hindu soul in West Punjab. From Sind, I think more than

seventy-five per cent. of the Hindus havealready come over to the Indian Union. So far as Bengal is concerned. lakhs of people have already come over to West Bengal fromEast Bengal. You might differ about the figures. Some mayput it at twenty lakhs, others at thirty lakhs or atsomething more, but the most conservative estimate would betwenty lakhs from Eastern Pakistan due to this partitionbusiness, and the number is increasing day by day becausethe exodus still continues. By the time the general electionunder the new constitution is held, there will be a furtherinflux and the number may swell to forty lakhs. The influxof people from East Pakistan began in 1941. When theJapanese entered the war against Great Britain, people leftEastern Bengal and came in very large numbers to WestBengal, in quest of jobs, war service, contracts and all therest of it. Then came the disastrous Bengal famine of 1943and again very large numbers of people moved from EasternPakistan to Calcutta where there was a greater chance ofgetting a morsel of food than in Eastern Bengal. Thus in1943 the influx intensified-which brought in a much largernumber of people than the ravages of the Japanese war. Itherefore ask the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to takethis fact carefully into consideration that the populationof West Bengal today is not to be judged by the publishedand ascertained figures in the census of 1941, that it isconsiderably in excess of them and the excess is due to thefacts I have mentioned. First, the influx commenced with theJapanese aggression. Secondly it was intensified by thefamine of 1943. Thirdly it has gone beyond all proportionsdue to the friendly activities of our friends in EasternPakistan. This is continuing and will continue, I am sure,notwithstanding all that we do in the Inter-DominionConferences. Therefore, Sir, the net result would be that ifWest Bengal is to be allocated seats on the principle ofuniformity based on population figures of 1941 census asenvisaged in this article, it will occasion grave injusticeto the province which will be hopelessly under-represented in the legislatures, both Central and provincial.

If you want to avoid this, if you want a just and fairdeal to be given to the provinces of West Bengal, EastPunjab, Bombay and to the City of Delhi, where vast numbersof refugees from Pakistan have come and settled and haveswelled their normal population, as indicated in the censusfigures of 1941, the first thing that the Government shoulddo is that, before they put into effect the Constitution inso far as it relates to the composition of legislatures,they should order an ad hoc census in these provinces. Iunderstand that the usual census would be due in 1951 and Ifurther understand that the Government of the day is notprepared to wait till then for general Election under thenew Constitution. They want to expedite the election inaccordance with the Constitution. They want to expedite theelection in accordance with the Constitution which will beadopted. If this decision of the Government to enforce the Constitution and to hold the general election thereunder,before the year 1951 stands, it is of utmost importance that there should be a fresh census before that, and that censusshould be ordered here and now for the provinces of WestBengal, East Punjab, Delhi and Bombay. These are theprovinces which are greatly affected, and I hope this aspectof the question would engage the serious attention, in thefirst instance, of the Chairman of the Drafting Committee,who, I am sure, will realize the injustice that wouldotherwise be occasioned. And I trust that he would advisethe Government, of which he forms an important limb, that this should be given effect to before the Constitution isput into operation.

Sir, I have on several occasions, here and elsewhere,brought this matter to the notice of the authorities. I havepleaded with them for mercy and for justice in this respect.I want the House to bear in mind the consequences that wouldotherwise follow. On the one hand, the Hindu community wouldbe hopelessly

under-represented in the legislatures and onthe other, there is every likelihood of the Muslim communitygetting heavy excess of representation, if the censusfigures of 1941 are acted upon. This would be a gravepolitical injustice and I caution the Government to takenote of this.

Sir, I do not know whether I can really support thisamendment with all my heart. As it is, I do not believe that this amendment improves the situation in any way. Anyway thewhole matter is left to the House, and if the House thinksthat the amendment of Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad will improvematters, I have nothing to say. Personally, I am of opinionthat it does not improve matters.

Mr. Vice-President: I have here slips from four eminentmembers of our House. So far as I have been able to judge,the question centres round a particular amendment and I alsobelieve that sufficient light has been thrown upon it. Ifhonourable Members insist on their right to speak, I amwilling to ask them one by one. On the other hand, if theyare good enough to accept my suggestion, then the businessof the House can be expedited. I am in their hands.

Many Honourable Members: A short discussion may beallowed.

Maulana Hasrat Mohani (United Provinces: Muslim): Iwant only two minutes, Sir.

Mr. Vice-President: Please come to the mike.

Maulana Hasrat Mohani: Mr. Vice-President, I have comehere today simply to point out a very serious defect in thisarticle and in all other sections relating to the electionsystem that we have adopted in India, and that is this. Thegeneral procedure adopted in India and elsewhere also isthat if there be only one candidate and there is only oneseat, that candidate is automatically elected. I think thisis a very serious defect in our system of election. InSoviet Russia even if there is only one candidate, still theelection is held, as there is always a chance that a personmay manoeuvre to remove the names of other rival candidatesand in this way the electorate may be in a position tooppose him by a majority vote. Then it will not be on thebasis that there is one candidate or one seat. I may saythat I have not proposed any amendment in this Constitutionbecause from the very beginning, I hold that this wholething is absurd. I do not accept its authority. I regardthis Constituent Assembly as not competent and therefore, I have not moved any amendment. I simply make a suggestionthat something should be added by the Honourable Dr. B. R.Ambedkar and his Committee to remove this defect and adoptthe same course that has been adopted in Soviet Russia.There, even when there is only one candidate, the electionis still held to find out if it is not possible that themajority may be opposed to him. Even supposing there is nota sufficient number to oppose the man, I think, we are notjustified in electing him automatically and taking him aselected.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: With your permission, Sir, can Ispeak a few words?

Mr. Vice-President: I cannot break a convention whichhas been established after very great difficulty. Prof.Shibban Lal Saksena.

Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena (United Provinces: General):Mr. Vice-President, Sir, I want to draw the attention of the House to one fact, to which my honourable Friend Mr. Tyagireferred. Herein, we have provided for proportionalrepresentation for the election of the President. I thinkthat there is some mistake in this clause. Proportionalrepresentation is possible by means of the singletransferable vote, but here every member will have morevotes than one and they will be calculated according toelaborate and complicated calculations and I do not thinkthat proportional representation is possible in such a case.I feel that Mr. Tyagi has rightly pointed out that the onlyway to elect the President in the first case can be byelimination. There should be voting and the man who gets theminimum votes should be discarded.

Then among the remaining candidates, there should again bevoting and the candidate with the minimum number of votesshould be discarded. In this way among the remaining twocandidates, the man who

gets more should be elected. That isthe only way in which one man can be elected with themajority of votes. Proportional representation is not adirect method especially when every single voter in theCentral ParlI ament will have a larger number of votesattached to him than members of the Provincial Legislature.What will happen is that the voters of the CentralLegislature will give their first preferences to somebody,and similarly voters of the Provincial Legislatures willgive preference to some other person and the preferences,when they are carried over to other members, are verydifficult to calculate, because their ways are different. I,therefore, think that the Drafting Committee shouldreconsider this matter and substitute the system which I have suggested, and in that way, we can be sure that the manwho is elected will have a real majority of votes and notvotes which are less than 50 per cent. That I think shouldbe one change in the article.

About the census, Sir, I also feel that there has beena great change in the population figures during the last tenyears, especially in the big cities. I know in Cawnpore, thepopulation in 1941 was four lakhs; now it is about tenlakhs. I do not know what will be the number of seatsallotted to it and similar big cities. As has been pointedout by my honourable Friend, in the provinces of Punjab andBengal, there has been a large exodus. I also know that therefugees who have come from outside, about a crore, havebeen distributed to all the provinces. I therefore agreewith the revered Thakkar Bapa that there should be a censusbefore the election. I must also suggest one thing. We areprepared to follow the principle of adult suffrage in theelections. We can allot seats for the first term on thebasis of the number of electors in the various communities.Out of a population of 33 crores, you will have fifteencrores of voters and the seats may be distributed accordingto the proportion of the voters in the various communities.I think that is a better method. Either we do away withproportional representation altogether: that is one methodof getting over the difficulty; still there will bedifficulty in giving seats to the various provinces. I thinkthis is a general difficulty and something should be done toremove it.

The amendment given notice of by Mr. Naziruddin Ahmadwill only improve matters, if there is a census before theelection takes place. If that is the purpose, I think thatis a proper amendment to be accepted.

I think this system of election of the President by thedifferent States is a proper system, when we have rejectedthe system of direct election. Personally, I would havepreferred direct election in which every voter would havevoted for the election of the President by a direct vote.Although the President has no powers, still he would havegreat prestige. In fact, our President will be thesubstitute for the King in England. If the King in Englandhas got prestige far above the Prime Minister, I think ourPresident should have that prestige. I think this is theonly method by which you can have an election in which thevoters in every province will take part. I think at leastthis section should be reviewed by the learned Doctor to seethat the system of proportional representation is replacedby the other system that I have recommended.

Shri R. K. Sidhwa (C. P. & Berar: General): Mr. Vice-President, Sir, this article relates to two importantpoints: one relating to the election of the President inaccordance with the system of proportional representation bymeans of the single transferable vote, and the other aboutthe census on the population figures on which therepresentation of the different States has to be fixed.

Now, I consider, Sir, that the single transferable votesystem is one of the best systems that has been produced. Itgives the voter first choice, second choice and third choicefor the election of a candidate. But, there is one factor:the single transferable vote system would worksatisfactorily when there are more than one seat. Here is aquestion of electing one

President. Therefore, I feel thatwhile the system is very good, it would create manydifficulties and complications if we adopt the method of thesingle transferable vote of which we have got sufficientexperience. I would have preferred the elimination system in the election of the President. That would also give theright of voting to every voter and the candidate who getsthe largest number of votes will be elected. For example, ifthere are five candidates, the man who gets the lowestnumber of votes is eliminated from the list Then, all thevoters again vote among the four remaining candidates, andwhosoever gets the lowest number is again eliminated. Again,the same voters vote between the remaining three. At theend, all the voters exercise their vote between theremaining two. That means, each voter exercises the rightfor every candidate. In the election of the President, I would personally prefer the elimination system which wouldbe really beneficial and efficient in working. I feel that the single transferable vote system would worksatisfactorily where there are more than one seat and wherea small minority has also the right of being returned.

Coming to the census, Sir, this is a very importantmatter and I should think that the point advanced by myhonourable Friend Thakkar Bapa should not be lost sight of.Many honourable members have spoken on this subject and weall know that, after the partition, the 1941 census figuresin certain provinces will certainly not work satisfactorily.I will give you an illustration. In Sind, there werethirteen lakhs of people. Except two lakhs who are nowthere, who could not be evacuated for want of transport,there are eleven lakhs of Sindhis who are scattered over thevarious parts of the country. There are four lakhs of themin Bombay; about two and a half lakhs in the UnitedProvinces. I may tell you that there are many of them inAjmere and in the various other States. I may also tell youthat forty five per cent of the population of Ajmereconsists of Sindhis. In Rajputana States, Jaipur, Jodhpur,there are nearly two lakhs of them. How could we rely on the1941 census figures? Again, the 1941 census figures weredefective. On account of the war, actually, the behest wasissued by the then Government that the census should betaken on a very moderate scale. If you refer to the 1931 and the previous census, you will find that particulars arerecorded in respect of all columns so that it gives you anidea of what our population consisted of. In the 1941census, half the number of columns have been done away with.That had a reaction on the number of the population in thevarious provinces. I therefore consider it a very suicidalpolicy if the 1941 census is to be taken into consideration,particularly for the four or five provinces where therefugees have migrated. I do not know the real meaning ofMr. Naziruddin's Amendment. The amendment says, "the latestcensus of which the relevant figures have been published".Assuming that the election is to take place in 1950, thelatest figures would be those of the 1941 census. When it issaid that Mr. Naziruddin's amendment is going to beaccepted, I would like clarification on the point what isconveyed by the phrase, "latest census of which the relevantfigures have been published." The latest figures are alreadythere of the 1941 census. I feel that before the electiontakes place, there should be a census, particularly for theprovinces to which the refugees have migrated. Otherwise, I think a great injustice would have been done to them if forno fault of theirs they should be denied the right of votingby taking into consideration the 1941 census figures. Iconsider, Sir, this is a very important matter.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad's amendment creates complications andthat requires clarification.

Shri H. V. Kamath: (C. P. & Berar: General): Mr. Vice-President, I rise to reinforce the plea that has been madeby our venerable colleague. Thakkar Bapa and ably supportedby our friend Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra. It is commonknowledge that the census of 1941 was taken

underextraordinary circumstances. A World War of tremendousmagnitude was on and hundreds of thousands of people weredisplaced from their homes and scattered not merely all overthe country but all over the world. This was one fact whichcontributed to the incorrect enumeration of the last censusof 1941. Since then we have had catastrophes and calamitiesin rapid succession; for four years thereafter that Warraged, and in the middle of the war we had a famine and thensoon after the war, we had vivisection of the country. Thesecalamities have led to the uprooting of vast masses of thepopulation, the destruction of large numbers of people andcertainly to movements of large numbers of people from onepart of the country to another. If we want to be fair at thenext election and provide proper and just representation to the people, it is very necessary that there should be acorrect enumeration before the elections are held.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: You may have a special census.How can you proceed without figures? My attention wasdirected to the figures-not the 1941 census.

Shri H. V. Kamath: I do not insist upon a regularcensus being held before the elections but we must have thefigures, not merely for the purpose of this article, but aswe all know the Constitution provides for and I think weadhere to the principle of reservation for certaincommunities like the Scheduled Castes and the Muslims.Unless we know and we have the figures of these communitiesfor whom reservation will be made in the legislature, howcan we allot the number of seats for these communities? it is hoped in some quarters that perhaps at no distant datepeople who have migrated from Pakistan to India and viceversa may be enabled to go back, to their countries. I thinkit is a vain hope and I do not think the status quo antewill be restored in the near future. I remember, Sir, inthis connection last year when the Provincial constitutionwas discussed here in this House, my friend Mr. Khandekarraised this point about the Scheduled Castes. He said thatin 1941 the enumeration of Harijans was defective and that it was an underestimate and therefore he wanted that beforethe next elections there should be a re-enumeration in thewhole of India. In my opinion this applies not only toHarijans but to all the communities which have got to beproperly represented in the Legislature under the NewConstitution. Replying to Mr. Khandekar, Sardar Patel, if Iremember aright, though he did not make any promise, but heassured Mr. Khandekar and others of his way of thinking that this point will be duly borne in mind and considered andthat before the elections we would try our best to arrive atcorrect figures for the population of the variouscommunities in this country. My friend Mr. Algu Rai Shastrythe other day referred to the non-representation of SindhiHindus in this Assembly. It is a great anomaly that though,after the partition the East Punjab non-Muslims or Hindusand the West Bengal Hindus have been re-presented-their re-presentations have been increased after the movement of these people from West Punjab to East Punjab and from EastBengal to West Bengal,--Sind has gone by default. Sind isnow represented neither in this House nor in the PakistanConstituent Assembly. They have lost the one seat which wasallotted to them, because the Hindus that have migrated fromSind to India are scattered. Some are in Bombay, some are inC.P. and I do not know where the others are scattered, and therefore it is difficult forany Provincial Assembly to elect any Sindhi as from thatprovince because under our representation system, there mustbe at least 10 lakhs of people for one representative inthis Assembly. But whatever that may be, we ought to havethe enumeration of all these masses of people who havemigrated either from Sind or West Punjab or East Bengal orthe Frontier to India, prior to the next elections. Unlesswe have a correct record of all these movements of verylarge numbers of peoples, almost unparalleled in our recenthistory, it will be unfair and unjust to the people of ourcountry to hold elections

before the correct enumeration ismade, if not by the regular census, at least by an ad hoccensus as my friend suggested.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Mr. Vice-President,Sir, I accept the amendment No. 25 of List 1 to amendmentNo. 1083 moved by my friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad. The otheramendments I am sorry, I cannot accept. Now, Sir, in thecourse of the general debate, two questions have beenraised. One is one the amendment of Mr. Naziruddin. It hasbeen pointed out by various speakers that it would be verywrong to base any election on the last census viz., of 1941.I am sure there is a great deal of force in what has beensaid by the various speakers on this point. It is true that the 1941 census was in some areas, at any rate, a cookedcensus; a census was cooked by the local Government that wasin existence, in favour of certain communities and operatedagainst certain other communities. But apart from that, it is equally true that on account of the partition of Indiathere has been a great change in the population and itscommunal composition in certain provinces of India, forinstance, in the East Punjab, Bombay, West Bengal and tosome extent in U. P. also. In view of the fact that the Constitution provides for representation to variouscommunities in accordance with their ratio of population to the general population, it is necessary that not only thetotal population, of every particular province should beascertained but that the proportion of the variouscommunities to which we have guaranteed representation inaccordance with their population should also be ascertainedbefore the foundations of the Constitution are laid down interms of election.

I have no doubt about it that the Government will payattention to the various arguments that have been made infavour of having a true census of the people before theelections are undertaken. If I may say so, one of thereasons which persuaded me to accept the amendment of myfriend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad is that he used the word`latest' in preference to the word `last' . I thought that the word `last' had a sort of a local colour in the sensethat the last census may mean the periodical census which istaken every ten years; and the last census means the censustaken before any operation of election is started.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: I did not use those words. I saidthe last preceding census.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Anyhow, I did notpay much attention to what he said. But that certainly is myidea. that this clause shall not prevent the Government fromhaving a new census before proceeding to have elections for the new legislature. I think that should satisfy mostMembers who have an apprehension on this point.

Shri Mahavir Tyagi: May I take it that you give anassurance that such a census will be taken ?

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I cannot possiblygive an assurance. But no government will overlook the vastchanges that have taken place in the composition and thetotal population of the different provinces. We haveguaranteed representation to a great population consistingof various minorities. There has been a great deal of debate, as honourable Members know,over the question of weightage, and we know that weightagehas been disallowed. If we now have the elections and allowthem to take place and the seats to be assigned on theexisting basis of population, when as a matter of fact, thatbasis has been lost by migrations, it might result inweightage to various communities, and no representation tocertain communities. Obviously in order to avoid such a kindof thing and to see that no community has any weightage,undoubtedly, government will have to see that the census isa proper census.

Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra: I want to know whether thehonourable Member means that no election under the newConstitution should be held unless this census was taken.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Well, it seems to meonly a natural conclusion, because the seats for theelections cannot be assigned unless the populations of thevarious communities are ascertained.

Therefore, that seemsto me the logical conclusion, and a new census will beinevitable.

The other question that was greatly agitated by Mr.Tyagi and by Begum Aizaz Rasul and certain other membersrelated to the election of the President. Now, there are twoways of electing the President. One way is to elect him bywhat is called a bare majority of the House. If a man got 51percent., he would be elected. That is one way of electingthe President and that is the simple and straightforwardone. Now, with regard to that, it may just happen that themajority party would be in a position to elect the Presidentwithout the minority party having any voice in the electionof the President without the minority party having any voicein the election of the President. Obviously no Member of the House would like the President to be elected by a baremajority or by a system of election in which the minoritieshad no part to play. That being so, the election of thePresident by a bare majority has to be eliminated, and we have to provide a system whereby the minorities will havesome voice in the election of the President. The only methodof giving the minorities a voice in the election of thePresident is, so to say, to have separate electorates and toprovide that the President must not only have a majority buthe must have a substantial number of votes from eachminority. But that again, seems to me, to be a propositionwhich we cannot accept having regard to what we have laiddown in the constitution, namely, that there shall be noseparate electorates. The only other method, therefore, thatremained was to have a system of election in which theminorities will have some hand and some play, and that isundoubtedly the system of proportional representation, whichhas been laid down in the Constitution.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: There is to be transferability.How can there be proportional representation when there isonly one man to be elected?

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I really cannot gointo this question in detail. To do so I will have to open aclass and lecture on the subject; but I cannot undertakethat task at this stage. However, it is well-known andeverybody knows how the system works.

Mr. Vice-President: These interruptions show that someMembers are not aware of the true nature of proportionalrepresentation. You need not pay attention to theseinterruptions.

Maulana Hasrat Mohani: What are you going to do ifthere is only one candidate?

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: If there is only onecandidate, he will be elected unanimously (Laughter), and noquestion of majority or minority arises at all.

The other question asked by Mr. Tyagi was whether therewas any procedure for eliminating candidates.

Shri Mahavir Tyagi: On a point of information, Sir.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: No I cannot yield. I am answering your point. Your point was whether there was aprocess of elimination in the system of election which hasbeen provided. My answer is, yes, [proportionalrepresentation involves elimination. Otherwise it has nomeaning. The only thing that we have done is that instead ofhaving several proportional representations, we haveprovided one single proportional representation, in whichevery, candidate at the bottom will be eliminated, until wereach one man who gets what is called a "quota".]

Shri Mahavir Tyagi: But in the ParlI ament the system ofalternative votes is adopted.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Alternative is onlyanother name for proportional.

Sir I have nothing further to say on this point.

Shri Mahavir Tyagi: Sir, I want to know........

Mr. Vice-President: Mr. Tyagi, my difficulty is Icannot compel the Chairman of the Drafting Committee toanswer your questions. Neither can I compel him to clarifyyour doubts.

I am going to put these amendments, one by one to vote.

I put amendment No. 1075 to vote.

The question is:

That in sub-clause (c) of clause (2) of article 44, for the words "such member" the words "the elected members ofboth Houses of ParlI ament" be substituted.

The amendment was


Mr. Vice-President: No. 1078. The question is:

That for clause (3) of article 44, the following besubstituted:

"(3). The election of the President shall be held bysecret ballot and in accordance with the system of majoritypreferential voting by the single alternative vote."

That amendment was negatived.

Mr. Vice-President: No. 1079. The question is:

That in clause (3) of article 44, the words "inaccordance with the system of proportional representation"be omitted.

That amendment was negatived.

Mr. Vice-President: The question is:

That for the Explanation to article 44, the followingExplanation be substituted:

"Explanation.--In this article, the expression`population' means the population as ascertained at the lastpreceding census of which the relevant figures have beenpublished.

The amendment was adopted.

Mr. Vice-President:-- The question is:

"That article 44, as amended, stand part of the Constitution."

The motion was adopted.

Article 44, as amended, was added to the Constitution.


Mr. Vice-President: The honourable Member concerned maymove amendment No. 1084. I would like honourable Members tobe as brief as possible, in which case we would be able toget through the article before the House concludes itsdeliberations today. But that does not mean that I am askinganybody not to speak or to omit important points which theymight like to make.

Shri T. T. Krishnamachari: Sir, the honourable Member'samendment is substantially the same as the article, anddeals only with the substantive part of the clause and notwith the proviso. Is there any object in the honourableMember moving his amendment?

Mr. Mohd. Tahir: There is a difference in the meaningof the amendment and the article, and I shall explain how.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It is not anamendment at all: it is merely a transposition of the words.There is no difference at all.

Mr. Mohd. Tahir: There is some difference...

Mr. Vice-President: I do not want to stand in the wayof any honourable Member but there does not seem to be muchin this amendment. However, the honourable Member may moveit.

Mr. Mohd. Tahir: Sir, I beg to move:

That for the substantive part of article 45, thefollowing be substituted:--

"The term of office of the President shall be fiveyears from the date the President enters upon the Office."

The point was raised now that between the article as itstands and the amendment there is no difference. First Iwill deal with the article as it stands. It says "ThePresident shall hold office for a term of five years fromthe date on which he enters upon his office". Supposing theelection of the President takes place in 1950 after thegeneral election and the constitution of the ParlI ament, ifthere is a casual vacancy in the office of the President in1951 or 1952, in that case the President will be holdingoffice for five years, that is he will have the office from1951 to 1955, whereas the ParlI ament which was constitutedin 1950 ends in 1954. My amendment means that the term ofoffice of the President will be for five years, which meansthat if there is any casual vacancy or the election of thePresident takes place in 1950 and then there is a casualvacancy in 1951, the office of the President who will beelected in the casual vacancy will end in 1954, that is theterm of five years when the ParlI ament ends. This is thedifference which I have made out in my amendment of thearticle as it stands.

The question now arises as to why I have moved thisamendment. The only point before me is that I want that theelection of the President or the General election should notbe influenced by any authority in power. The election mustalways be free and democratic. For instance, if a man iselected as President in the casual vacancy and he continuesin office after the term of the ParlI ament ends at theCentre, it follows that the man who will remain in office asPresident will easily influence the General election as wellas the election of the President. I want, Sir, that thereshould

be no influence on the general election or on theelection of the President in any case and therefore if thearticle as it stands means that the President who is electedin a casual vacancy will also hold office only for theremaining term of five years, that is to say his office willrun according to the term of the ParlI ament, then of courseI am not going to press my amendment. But in case it meansthat the term of ParlI ament will end and the office of thePresident will continue, then surely my amendment will standand I will press it. With these words I move and I hope theposition will be made clear.

(Amendment No. 1085 was not moved.)

Mr. Vice-President: Amendment No. 1086 is disallowed asit is a verbal amendment.

Amendments Nos. 1087 and 1088 are identical. Dr.Ambedkar may move No. 1087.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I move:

That in clause (a) of the proviso to article 45, for the word "resignation" the word "writing" be substituted.

Mr. Mohd. Tahir: Mr. Vice-President, Sir, I beg tomove:

That in clause (a) of the proviso to article 45, for the words "Chairman of the Council of States and the Speakerof the House of the People" the words "members of theParlI ament" be substituted.

I will not be very long. I only wish to submit that if thePresident, who has been elected by the members of theParlI ament, wants to vacate his office by resigning hispost, in all fairness it is desirable that he should addresshis resignation to the members of the ParlI ament and not toanyone else. The resignation letter may be handed over to the office, namely to the Speaker or to the Chairman of theCouncil of States, but he must address his resignation to the members of ParlI ament who elected him as President andto none else.

Mr. Vice-President: The next amendment is No. 1090standing in the name of Mr. B. M. Gupte with an amendment toit by himself (No. 26 in List I Fourth Week).

Shri B. M. Gupte (Bombay: General): I desire to movethe amendment in a slightly modified form. The modificationis only formal. It is with regard to the re-arrangement of the clause. I seek your permission and that of thehonourable House to move it in the revised form.

Mr. Vice-President: Does the House give permission toMr. Gupte to move his amendment in a slightly differentform? Of course it is not possible at this hour to supplycopies of this to all the Members. So Mr. Gupte may read theoriginal and the altered forms of the amendment.

Honourable Members: Yes.

Shri B. M. Gupte: Sir, I beg to move:

That for amendment No. 1090 the following besubstituted:--

(1) Article 45 be re-numbered as clause (1) of that article. (2) In clause (a) of the proviso to the said clause as so re-numbered for the words "Chairman of the Council of States and the Speaker of the House of the People" the word "Vice-President" be substituted. (3) In the said article as re-numbered add the following clause:-- "(2) Any resignation addressed to the Vice-President under clause (a) of the proviso to clause (1) of this article shall forthwith be communicated by him to the Speaker of the House of the People.)

Sir, the clause as it stands in the Draft Constitutionprovides that the resignation shall be addressed to twopersons, namely, the Chairman of the Council of States and the Speaker of the House of the people. This is obviouslyinconvenient. It is therefore better that provision shouldbe made that one person should receive the resignation andbe responsible to set the machinery in motion to fill thevacancy. And that person is most properly the Vice-President. I have therefore provided that the Vice-Presidentshould receive the resignation. But at the same time it isdesirable that the Speaker of the House of the people shouldalso know it, and therefore by a subsequent clause I haveprovided that the Vice-President shall forthwith communicatethis fact of resignation to the Speaker of the House of thepeople. I therefore hope the amendment will be acceptable toDr. Ambedkar and to the House.

Mr. Vice-President: Does Mr. Kamath wish to move

hisamendment to this (No. 27 of List I-Fourth week)?

Shri H.V. Kamath: No. That has been covered by theamended amendment just now moved by Mr. Gupte.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: Sir, I beg to move:

That for the words "House of the People" in paragraph(a) of the proviso to article 45 and in all the other placeswhere these words occur, the words "National Congress" besubstituted.

Sir, in the future Constitution there will be twoHouses at the Centre; the popular House would be called the House of the People and the Upper House will be called theCouncil of States. My proposal is that the popular Houseshould be named after the National Congress which has beenlargely instrumental in obtaining freedom for this country.

Shri T. T. Krishnamachari: But actually the Congressstill exists.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: I want to perpetuate the name of the National Congress and want it to be assimilated in the Constitution itself.

Mr. Vice-President: I think you need not take up thetime of the House.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: I shall be very very brief. Thestruggle for independence has been going on for the lastsixty years or more and it is to culminate in the session of the Congress in Jaipur under the presidency of Dr. PattabhiSitaramayya. I submit that the struggles and the services of the National Congress be recognized officially and thepopular House be named after it.

I have the American precedent where the Legislature iscalled the Congress I have chosen, however, here to givethat name to the popular House which really represents thewill of the people. I believe it is an amendment based onsentimental grounds.

Maulana Hasrat Mohani: Are you a member of theCongress?

Shri S. Nagappa: He wants to be now.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: It does not require one to be amember of the Congress to recognize or admit facts.

Mr. Vice-President: I beg of you to remember that we have only twenty minutes left.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: Sir, I submit that on sentimentalgrounds alone the amendment should be accepted. In fact theculmination of today's independence represents the blood,toil, tears and the sweat of the Indian National Congress.

Mr. Vice-President: Does Mr. Kamath wish to moveamendment No. 1092?

Shri H. V. Kamath: Here also I have been forestalled byMr. Gupte and so it does not arise.

(Amendments Nos. 1093 and 1094 were not moved.)

Giani Gurmukh Musafir: (East Punjab: Sikh): *[Sir, Myamendment is.

That in clause (b) of the proviso to article 45 afterthe words "violation of the constitution" the words "or oflaw" be inserted.

In relation to the President clause (b) says--"The Presidentmay for violation of the Constitution be removed from officeby impeachment in the manner provided in article 50 of thisConstitution".

After the words `violation of the constitution' it isvery necessary to add the words `or of law'. The Presidentshould be impeached not only for the violation of the Constitution but he should be treated in the same manner for the violation of law too.]

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: I beg to move:

That in proviso (c) of article 45, after the word`term' the words `or resignation as the case may be' beinserted.

By this proviso, the President shall continue inoffice, notwithstanding the expiration of his normal term ofhis office, till his successor enters upon his office. Iwant to make the proviso to apply when he resigns before hisnormal term expires. This amendment is practically adrafting amendment worthy of consideration.


* [] Translation of Hindustani speech.

Mr. Vice-President: As no Member has desired to speakon the general discussion of this article, I propose to askDr. Ambedkar to reply to the debate. I have received a sliprequesting for an opportunity to speak just now. It has cometoo late.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, the onlyamendment that I accept is No. 1090 as amended by Mr.Gupte's amendment. The others I am sorry I cannot accept.There has been no point raised by any Member which requiresany explanation.

Mr. Vice-President: I am

going to put the amendments tovote. The question is:

"That for the substantive, part of article 45, thefollowing be substituted:-- `The term of office of the President shall be fiveyears from the date the President enter upon the Office.'"

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. Vice-President: Now, the question is--

That in clause (a) of the proviso to article 45 for theword `resignation' the word `writing' be substituted.

The amendment was adopted.

Mr. Vice-President: The question is--

That in clause (a) of the proviso to article 45, for the words `Chairman of the Council of States and the Speakerof the House of the People' the words `members of theParlI ament' be substituted.

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. Vice-President: Now I shall put amendment No. 1090as modified by amendment No. 26(A) standing in the name ofShri B.M. Gupte to the vote of the House. The question is:

That-- [(1) Article 45 be re-numbered as clause (1) of thatarticle.

(2) In clause (a) of the proviso to the said clause asso re-numbered for the words `Chairman of the Council ofStates and the Speaker of the House of the People' the word`Vice-President' be substituted.

(3) In the said article as re-numbered add thefollowing clause:--.

"(2) Any resignation addressed to the Vice-Presidentunder clause (a) of the proviso to clause (1) of thisarticle shall forthwith be communicated by him to theSpeaker of the House of the People."

The amendment was adopted.

Mr. Vice-President: The question is:

That for the words `House of the People' in paragraph(a) of the proviso to article 45 and in all the other placeswhere these words occur, the words "National Congress" besubstituted.

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. Vice-President: The question is--

That in clause (b) of the proviso to article 45, afterthe words `violation of the Constitution', the words `or oflaw' be inserted.

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. Vice-President: The question is--

That Article 45, as amended, stand part of the Constitution.

The motion was adopted.

Article 45, as amended, was added to the Constitution.

Mr. Vice-President: It is now a quarter past one.

Shri T. T. Krishnamachari: The next article has onlyone small amendment.

Article 46

Mr. Vice-President: We shall now take up the nextarticle. Article 46 is now before the House for itsconsideration.

As amendment No. 1097 is for the deletion of thearticle I disallow it. The amendment of Professor ShibbanLal Saksena to this amendment falls as the main amendmenthas been ruled out.

Shri Krishna Chandra Sharma (United Province General):Sir, I move:

That in article 46 the words `once, but only once' bedeleted.

My amendment is a very simple one. It is to the effectthat if a capable and efficient man is available, why shouldhe not be allowed to serve a second term by seeking re-election and giving the benefit of his service to the nationas long as he is efficient and capable of service.

(Amendment No. 1099 was not moved).

Shri H.V. Kamath: Mr. Vice-President, I move:

"That in article 46, after the words `only once' acomma and the words `but he shall not be so eligible if hehas been removed from office by impeachment in the mannerprovided in article 50' be added."

Even considering as the article as it stands, I thinkthis amendment is to a certain extent necessary, purely for the purpose of clarifying the content of the article. Butnow, in view of the amendment moved by Shri Krishna ChandraSharma, it is necessary for us to make this absolutelyclear. It is likely that, in case Mr. Sharma's amendment isaccepted, a person may contest the election again for thepresidentship some years after his first or second term. Itmay be said against this amendment that the party nominatinga candidate will certainly not nominate a person who hasbeen removed from office by impeachment. But, (consideringthat public memory is so short and even party memory isshort, and there have been instances in various countries of the world where men who have been accused and

impeached forcorruption and other nefarious practices have been able tofill some office or other at a later date when people hadforgotten the past such a provision becomes necessary.) Suchthings have happened in many countries and it is notunlikely that such a thing may happen here also--God forbid--when party memory being short one cannot completely excludethe possibility of some person who has been guilty ofcorruption or other misdemeanor being put up to contest theelection many years later. Therefore it is only to clarifythe whole content of this article that a person who has beenimpeached cannot stand for election at any time say, 5,10 or20 years later that I have moved this amendment. (It isnecessary to lay down that even though people may forget oroverlook the fact that a person had been impeached andremoved from office, he should not have the right to contestthe election for the Presidentship of the Indian Union.)

Shri Mahavir Tyagi: Sir, the amendment that I am movingis a very simple one. I move--

"That the following proviso be added to article 46:--

'Provided that it will not apply in the case of a Vice-President who holds or who has held such office onlytemporarily in an acting capacity."

"The article deals with the admissibility of thePresident holding office a second time. My point is that aVice-President who holds or who has held such office onlytemporarily in an acting capacity should not be debarredfrom standing for election to Presidentship twice. Ofcourse, if "officiating" by the Vice-President is notconsidered as holding office or some such meaning is given,then my amendment will not be necessary. Either Dr. Ambedkarmay accept my amendment or he may please clarify this pointin his speech.

Mr. Vice-President: Even though this article is a verysmall and simple one, many honourable Members want to speak.I do not want to prevent

them from speaking but I would request them to withdrawtheir slips. If they insist on making their speeches beforean already tired House, I am quite certain that what theymay urge will not be taken into consideration. This is myview but I may be wrong.

Honourable Members: We will draw our request to speak.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Mr. Vice-President,Sir, [I am prepared to accept the amendment of Mr. Sharma,i.e., No. 1098, for the deletion of the words "once, butonly once".

With regard to Mr. Kamath's amendment, I think theproper time when this matter could be discussed will be whenthe issue as to the qualifications of the person standingfor Presidentship is raised.

To Mr. Tyagi I may say that in view of the deletion of the words "once, but only once", his fears about the Vice-President are groundless.]

Mr. Vice-President: I shall now put the amendments oneby one to the vote. Amendment No. 1098. The question is:

"That in article 46 the words 'one, but only once' bedeleted."

The amendment was adopted.

Mr. Vice-President: Then amendment No. 1100.

Shri H. V. Kamath: In view of Dr. Ambedkar's statement,I do not want to press it.

The amendment was, by leave of the Assembly, withdrawn.

Mr. Vice-President: Then Mr. Tyagi's amendment. It doesnot arise after Dr. Ambedkar's speech, but some pandit oftechnicalities might say that I did not put it to the vote.So I want to know if Mr. Tyagi withdraws it or not.

Shri Mahavir Tyagi: Sir, I withdraw it.

The amendment was, by leave of the Assembly, withdrawn.

Mr. Vice-President: The question is:

That article 46, as amended, form part of the Constitution.

The motion was adopted.

Article 46, as amended, was added to the Constitution.

Mr. Vice-President: There has been a suggestion that the House should be adjourned for a few days for reasonswhich must be known to you all. Under the rules as theystand at present, the presiding officer does not have thepower to adjourn the House for fourteen days, i.e., till 10A.M. on Monday the 27th December.

Shri T. T. Krishnamachari: Sir, a proper motion may bemoved that the House may be adjourned for fourteen days.

Mr. Vice-President: I

do not care how you bring itabout. If what you suggest is the procedure, I am quitewilling and a resolution may be brought forward in thatform.

Shri Satyanarayan Sinha (Bihar: General): You can askthe House whether it is agreeable.

Mr. Vice-President: Is the House in favour ofadjourning for fourteen days?

Honourable Members: Yes.

Mr. Vice-President: The House stands adjourned till 10A.M. on Monday the 27th December.

The Assembly then adjourned till Ten of the Clock onMonday the 27th December 1948.