![91 Calling Attention to a Matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of Urgent Public Importance 92](http://data.docslib.org/img/e4e6e2dad7d236e48155b8b03b17267d-1.webp)
91 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 92
12 NOON SHRI S. N. MISHRA: Sir, my point of order is slightly different. I do recognise the CALLING ATTENTION TO A MATTER importance of this subject being discussed in OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE the House. I MR. CHAIRMAN : It is not a discussion. SITUATION ARISING OUT OF THE ECISIONOF THE SUPREME COURT SHRI S. N. MISHRA : But my objection is REGARDING THEPRESIDENTIAL based on the fact that we have not had enough ORDER DE-RECOGNISINGTHE opportunity to go through the text of the RULERS judgment. May I say that it would be too much to expect of us to go through the whole MR. CHAIRMAN : Calling Attention. judgment during the course of a night and then Mr. Bhupesh Gupta. come prepared for a discussion on this ? This has been abruptly inflicted on us by the Chair. SHRI MAHAVIR TYAGI (Uttar Pradesh) : I have a serious complaint against the Chair Sir, on a point of order. I do not want to that the Chair does not provide enough obstruct the Calling Attention notice, but I opportunity for a fuller discussion on the want your ruling for future guidance. subject when we can come thoroughly Yesterday, a similar question was permitted by prepared after studying the judgment. you to be mentioned by my hon. friend. Even SHRJ GODEY MURAHARI : If you though this issue was not on the agenda consider it so important, you should have yesterday, we spent about an hour or so on this studied it. issue. And it is coming again to-day. SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Please wait. I would SHRI A. G. KULKARNI (Maharashtra) ; not like any discussion on the subject to be What is wrong with that? stopped. I would like to fully participate in the discussion. Even at this point of time, may I SHRI MAHAVIR TYAGI : I am not say that I am not less prepared than any other obstructing it. I welcome it. What I am saying hon. Member on this subject ? But the point is is that such important matters, if they are that so many judgments have been delivered permitted once, should not be permitted to be which are voluminous ones and they would raised again. This is for future guidance. My certainly require some time to go through. The only request is that in future, whenever there Chair should have exercised its discretion to is an important question like that, you may the advantage of the Members in the sense that allow a regular discussion on that. the Members would require much more time than has been available so far to them, and a SHRI GODEY MURAHARI (Uttar Pradesh) : Sir, I would like to say something discussion on the subject should not have been on this. The point of order raised by Mr. Tyagi inflicted on us abruptly. is completely out of order because in the first MR. CHAIRMAN : Please sit down. place, yesterday there was no report of the judgment of the Supreme Court before the SHRI S. N. MISHRA : I would like to have House. It was only on certain information your ruling on this. You have been a jurist. conveyed by certain Members here that some Members spoke. It was a very important issue MR. CHAIRMAN ; Yes, I will give a and, therefore, the Deputy Chairman allowed ruling. some kind of a discussion. But, Sir, to-day's SHRI M. M. DHARIA (Maharashtra) : Sir, newspapers have carried the entire judgment I would like to say something on the point of and, therefore, you allowed the Calling order of Mr. S. N. Mishra. The point of order Attention notice to be admitted. It is quite in raised by Mr. Mishra has no validity what- order. soever because it is not a notice for a THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION discussion. You have only admitted a Calling (SHRI S. N. MISHRA) : Sir, I rise on a point Attention notice so that the Government can of order. make a statement and we can ask for clarifications. SHRI MAHAVIR TYAGI : It should not be discussed twice. That is my submission. 93 Calling Attention to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970 ] of urgent public importance 94
Mr. Chairman. Sir, this House should IE MINISTER OF STATE IN always remain alive to the problems ii the THE MINISTRY OF HOME country ; nd his point of order has no justificat AFFAIRS AND DEPARTMENT OF on whatsoever. So, from that point of view, in PERSONNEL IN THE CABINET order to know what the 'eelings of this country SECRETARIAT (SHRI RAM are, you have justified this Calling Attention NIWAS MIRDHA) : Sir, it was clear from the Notice, and the point of order raised by Mr. pattern of voting in the Lok Sabha on the Mishra should not at all be allowed. Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment) Bill that an overwhelming majority of the MR. CHAIRMAN : Let me give my ruling. Members of that House were in favour of the 1 rule t lis point out of order. abolition of Rulership, and the privy purses and the privileges that go with it. In the Rajya SHRI S. N. MISHRA : That was expected Sabha also, a sizeable proportion even of those of you who opposed the Bill said that they were not in favour of continuance of Rulership. It was thus clear that there was very wide support for MR. CHAIR! IAN : I do have the the termination of Rulership. Considering discretion, and raving received a notice from a these circumstances, and to put an end to a numbe of Members who wanted to know the period of political and other uncertainties so attitude of the Government I a lowed this Call undesirable in a matter of this nature, the Attention matter tc come today. It is not a recognition of all the Rulers was withdrawn question of discussion at all. by the President by orders issued on September 6, 1970. SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Could not the Chair have :aken more time ? It could have been The derecognition orders were challenged fixed tomorrow o/ the day after. Is i only the by means of writ petitions in the Supreme attitude of the Chair and the attitude of the Court, and by judgment delivered yesterday the Government ? ^ ou must not waste your court has struck down the orders. Government discretion ike this. It is failure of justice from stand committed to the abolition of privy the Chair. Why did you not allow it yesterday purses and privileges, and they will be in a position to take decision about the further ? steps to be taken in the matter after they have examined the Supreme Court's judgment MR. CHAIRI IAN : It has got to be carefully. followed. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : May I SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Now you request the hon. Members to be brief in their are going aw iy. You are a jurist. You observations and that they should not get must listen to this. excited while making the observations ? Let us IMR. DEPUTY C HAIRMAN in the Chair.] discuss this question in a peaceful atmosphere. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Mr. SHRI MAHAVIR TYAGI : Sir, this is a Bhupesh Cipta, please let us continue the question on which the Government has to Callin | Attention. come to some conclusion and that conclusion is the basic thing which we would like to SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA (West Bengal) : discuss again. Shall we have two discussions Sir, we congratulate the Chair and we are only ? beholden to you that you h ive admitted it. Some unkind words have been uttered about MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : That you but let me utter something contrary to depends on the circumstances or developments that. We are beholden to you, we are grateful in the future. to you, I must thank you. Sir. SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Sir, I am on a point I beg to call the attention of the Minister of of order and it is this. After the statement made Hone Affairs to the situation arising out of the by the honourable Minister, the honourable decision of the Supreme Court on the writ Minister said that the Government would take petitions challenging the Presidential Order time to study the judgment. Now, therefore, the de-recognising the rulers. discussion that would take place 1 today would be of an ill-informed 95 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 96
[Shri S. N. Mishra] nature. The in both Houses of Parliament. So I do not see Government would not be in a position to give any reason why we should not discuss the replies to the points raised by us. The matter of Privy purses and the judgment, say, Government has gone on record to say that it four times. We can discuss it today also, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, if you would... think fit. I do not see any point in objecting to SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Is it a point of it... order ? SHRI S. N. MISHRA : I am not SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Yes, it is. objecting to its discussion. SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Then, Mr. Deputy Chairman, allow us to contradict his SHRI GODEY MURAHARI : Let point of order. I shall demand it, 1 must be us carry on with what we have before us. allowed to contradict his point of order. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : It is SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Why is my very clear. Let us proceed with our Calling- honourable friend losing his temper ? I was Attention item. As pointed out by Mr. only saying... Murahari, we are discussing in this House issues according to the developments. Today a MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Mr. Calling-Attention Notice has been given and Mishra, you are saying the same thing. we are considering it. Supposing tomorrow there is a further development and some other SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Please listen to me. friends may want to raise it, and if we rind the Would you be pleased to fix a time during the time and if we find it necessary, the House course of the current session when the will discuss that also. Because the Government would be fully prepared to reply Government coulfl not make up its mind about to our points after a thorough study of the the judgment of the Supreme Court, we judgment? That is my point of order. That is should not discuss this matter in this House, what I wanted to submit to you. that point of order is not valid. So let us proceed with the Calling-Attention Motion. SHRI GODEY MURAHARI : Sir, I would like to say something on his point of order... SHRI LOKANATH MISRA (Orissa) : What do we discuss then ? SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: Mr. Deputy Chairman, I rise on a point of order. You are MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : The allowing all propagandist points of order. So Calling-Attention Notice. allow me to contradict them. {Interruptions.), SHRI GODEY MURAHARI : I would like to say something on the point of SHRI PITAMBER DAS (Uttar Pradesh) : order raised by Mr.~Mishra. To discuss the situation, not the judgment. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Why MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Here is a do you want to say anything on his point of statement made by the honourable Minister order ? Now, Mr. Bhupesh Gupta, please and according to the procedure for Calling- proceed. Attention motions, if the honourable Members want to ask for further SHRI GODEY MURAHARI : Please clarifications, they can ask. allow me, I would like to say something. SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : I thought my friends have won their legal victory while it is MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : His point of a moral defeat... (Inienuv-tions) I have never order is very clear and I will give my ruling. seen the alleged victors talking in such funk SHRI GODEY MURAHARI : In and fear... this House we have discussed ever so many DR. B. N. ANTANI (Gujarat) : A subjects, I think, umpteen times. I remember wonderful evaporation. the subject of small car was discussed perhaps a dozen times SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Sir, we have gone through, naturally, the summary of the judgment. It is a very 97 Calling Attentu n to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970] of urgent public importance 98
sweeping judgmen:. I have rarely come across Maharaja of Baroda or some such thing. The such a retrograde, conservative, reactionary, judgment is very sweeping. . . (Interruptions.) anti-sucial, judgment as the one which was It has challenged Articles. . . (Interruptions.). delivered in regard to the Presidential )rder. Sir, how can I proceed? This judgment has (Interruption.) That is number one. challenged Articles 291, 362, 396 and sub- clause (20) of Article 366 of the Constitution. SHRI S. I MISRA (Uttar It is a sweeping judgment. They have actually Pradesh) : He i imputing motives. There taken away the Parliament's and the people's cannot be my motives. right to make such legislation as is necessary for providing social justice and social progress SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: It is and even to come out of the legacy of the Parliament's sovereign right. We have colonial and feudal past. Obviously, the House amended the Constitution several times. Refer cannot accept such a decision from the to the speech of Pandit Jawahar-lal Nehru in Supreme Court. I should like to know. . . rega d to the Constitution (Fourth (Interruptions.) Amendment) Bill; what a devastating criticis- AN HON. MEMBER : What is the m of the High Court and the judgment he clarification ? made! I think some of our frieids are new- SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Please do not comers to Parliament... talk. . . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : You should (Interruptions.) not cast a ly aspersions on the Supreme Court. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Please continue your question. SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : Mr. Bhupesh Gupta who made that criticism ? SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : He is asking me : "What is the clarification that you are SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: I congratulate asking?". . . (Interruptions). Do my friends think that by talking like this, they can silence the Government for its reiteration, for the me? stant that it is taking. . . AN HON. MEMBER : It can never be SHRI LOKAN \TH MISRA ; Who done. made that criticisi i ? SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : All the princes' money cannot silence the voice of the people. SHRI BHUPE m GUPTA : Pandit I should like to know why there is delay in the Jawaharlal Nehru government coming to the conclusion that the SHRI LOKA> ATH MISRA : You are not Constitution can be, should be and must be amended at once in regard to these particular Pandit Nehru. Articles. I think that the other House passed SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : We can the Constitution (Amendment) Bill and two- understand the lo;s of balance in the thirds majority was there. Here also there was Swatantra Party. He is breaking his mind almost that majority but for one-third of a whether I vas Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. vote. Now we have that majority. The Government can easily pass the Bill now. I SHRI LOKAN \TH MISRA : That is what say that the Government can easily pass the you said. You cannot compare yourself with Constitution (Amendment) Bill now— Shri Nehru. Shri Bhupesh Gupta who specially when the Syndicate is cracking represents Russia in this country cannot under the weight of its sins and Shri Manubhai compare himself with the late Prime Minister Shah will now vote with us. . . (Interruptions.). of this country. . . (Interruptions.) SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : You are going to be a dead weight. Shri SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : My friend Shri Manubhai Shah was rejected in the Misra was not here when the Fourth Cons general election by the people. itution (Amendment) Bill was discusse J. For SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : I am his benefit, I have mentioned I precedent. . . not concerned with Shri Manubhai Shah. . . (Interruptions) . Surely, I know that I am not (Interruptions.) Pandit Jawaharla Nehru. But then you are talking ike, shall I say, the 4—64R.S./70. 99 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 100
MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : , mental Right and ail that. If that is so, Sir, Order, order... then again the hurdle arising out of the Golak Nath case will come. Therefore, Sir, Nath SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: I am Pai's Bill amending the Constitution should not allowed to speak. First of all, the the also be simultaneously passed in the same Constitution (Amendment) Bill should be session. . . brought during the... . (Interruptions.) (Interruptions.) SOME HON. MEMBERS : No. DR. B. N. ANTANI : On a point of order. What is his clarification ? SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: Sir, if we do this, if we pass the two Bills, then we would SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: I am asking have cleared the decks for easy sailing; the clarification. I am very glad that in this otherwise, there will be difficulty. I should hour of defeat, they are uniting all of us for a also like to know from the Prime counter revolution. Very well, we shall Minister, Sir, that the Government will not do it... think in terms of rushing to the elections and so on. Elections we shall think of later. (Interruptions.) Today let us come here, pass this Bill and if SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : You are a we want to pass this Bill and we cannot pass left reactionary. . . on account of opposition in either House, that should be made an issue for going to the (Interruptions.) elections. None should be called upon to go the polls now. I know, Sir, that will not serve MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : One the purpose and that will not solve the minute. Would you please. . . (Interruptions). problem. As far as the Rajya Sabha is I am on my legs. We have spent 20 minutes concerned, it is a permanent body... till now, but we could not... (Interruptions)... Sir, again this disturbance. . . As far-as the Rajya Sabha is concerned, it is SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: I am not a permanent body and they are in large allowed to speak. numbers. But there is a provision in the Constitution... (Interruptions)... If, in the SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : He is not Lok Sabha, the rightist elements and the clear what he should talk. progressive people are divided, there can be MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Please do a joint session of the two Houses and we can not interrupt me at least. I would appeal to the amend the Constitution in the joint session hon. Members to allow individual members counteracting the influence of the rightist to ask questions... {interruptions) so that we forces inside the House. Therefore, I will can have a number of questions during one suggest to the Government that steps should hour. . . be taken immediately, without delay, and we (Interruptions.) shall not allow the grass to grow under the feet. The Government acted very promptly SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : I will not be when it passed the Presidential Order and it cowed down. won the admiration of the people, the applause of the whole nation. Whatever be the MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Let there judgment of the Supreme Court, the whole be no interruptions, please. country applauded the Government when, on SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Sir, the first the 6th of September 1970, they issued the point I want to know is why there is no clear Presidential Order. . . and categorical decision that there should be a (Interruptions) Constitution (Amendment) Bill in regard to all the articles in order to put it into force and MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : That is implement what the Government has enough. Please sit down. accepted and enact this Bill. We are entitled SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Sir, I to this, Sir. suggest to the Prime Minister... Secondly, Sir, the Golak Nath case should MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Please also be gone into. Sir, I have read the ' sit down. judgment, I have gone through it. Some judges have said that it is property and also that it is a Funda- \
101 Calling AUentiol to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970] of urgent public importance 102
SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: I suggest to the MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Mr. Prime Minister. . . (Interruptions.). Tyagi, please sit down.
MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : That is SHRI MAHAVIR TYAGI : May I enough. Please sit down. request you, Sir...
SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Sir, I MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : All right. suggest to the Prime Minister. . . I have understood your point. (Interruptions) .. that next week a message be sent to all the Members of Parliament, draft the SHRI GODEY MURAHARI: Sir, I Bill and get it ready for the Budget session suggest that the reply be given at the end of and we shall have the Bill passed. . . all clarifications. ... (Interruptions). Sir, I (Interr ipions.). suggest that the reply be given at the end of all clarifications. MR. DEPUTY C HAIRMAN : Please sit SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : I would down. like my question to be replied too. SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : We SHRI MAHAVIR TYAGI : What about shall try and see it it is challenged in the my question ? By which time will the Supreme Cot rt. ... (Interruptions) ... Sir, it is Government be in a position to take a not a political question, but it is a decision ? Constitutional question, it is a question of the supremacy of Parliament. Sir, it should be MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Do you done... (Interruptions)... in the manner in want to say anything, Madam Prime which I have suggested. The Government Minister ? should act.
MR. DEPUTY C HAIRMAN : Please sit THE PRIME MINISTER (SHRIMATI down. INDIRA GANDHI) : This is a lengthy document. We have received it only this SHRI K. S. CHAVDA (Gujarat) : morning. Therefore, it is difficult to give a Sir, who will prote t us? time or date by which the study can be completed. I did not hear what you said, MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Mr. Shri Mishra However, I have replied to Shri Minister, you war t to reply? Afterwards? All Tyagi's question. (Interruption by Shri Arjun right. That will save the time also. All rig t. Arora).
SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : Sir, Shri MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Mr. Arjun Bhupesh Gup'a has given certain suggestions Arora do not interrupt, please. as to w iat the Government should do. He h; s referred to the Golak Nath case a; well as the SHRI A. G. KULKARNI : May I know Constitutional amendment which he wants the from the Government whether the Supreme Government to br ng forward. As I said in my Court judgment has added new dimensions to statement, all these questions will be taken the duties and rights of Parliament and the into account and the Government will lake the duties and rights of the court in this country ? necessary steps. Usually, Sir, in my mind I attach the maximum value and, what you call, respect to the SHRI MAHAVIR TYAGI : By Supreme Court or whatever court it is. The which time the Government will be in a days have changed. It is not only the legal position to take a final decision in this regard interpretation of the matter but the entire ? I w ant to. know this, Sir.... (Interruptions) gamut of the social change in the country that ... I do not has to be taken into consideration. But, Sir, in want to listen to th m. my clarification what I want to know from the SHRI ARJUN ARORA (Uttar Pradesh) : Government is whether the Government will Sir, what is this ? first do away with article 362 as provided for which gives these privileges to the Princes. SHRI A. G. KULKARNI : I do not know Sir, unless these personal privileges and ' what his point of order is. exemption from income tax and from 1 the Criminal Procedure Code go the 103 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 104
[Shri A. G. Kulkarni.j Princes will not come to a proper level of the other people in the country. But, apart from that, Sir, I wanted to know from the Government right now whether they will consider going to the polls with a clear mandate. Xet the new Lok Sabha also be a constituency which will give recognition and which will enact new laws and which will do away with property rights which are inherent in the vested interest and in the lollipop socialists. In this connection I wanted to say that property rights above a certain level have to be curtailed in this country ; conspicuous living is making a very wide gap in between. . SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : We are . discussing the effects of the judgment. . . (Interruptions.) (Interruptions.)
MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Order, MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Order, order. order, please. SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : They SHRI PITAMBER DAS : 'We are are vodka socialists. discussing the effect of the judgment.' SHRIMATI YASHODA REDDY (Andhra q% sit ^5T *ij% 53ft it ^T I n> A' q^ Pradesh) : On a point of clarification... <$s vp «rr f% is it a discussion over certain things MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : No or we are seeking clarifications? clarification, Mrs. Yashoda Reddy. Please sit (Interruptions) down. SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : The hon. SHRI A. G. KULKARNI: My second point Member was given a number of suggestions is this. The Government has also to take into and asked the Government to consider them. I consideration the quality of the Judges. When can assure him that all these things will be I say the quality of the Judges, the reference is properly considered. One thing he mentioned to the midnight order. The para-mountcy etc. about the abolition of property rights and are out of context with these high personages occupying the Supreme Court. . . things like that. I may make it clear that the Government is not opposed to property rights as such. But we do feel that there should be SHRI S. N. MISHRA : This is not proper. reasonable limits over these rights, so that the general social welfare is maintained. . . SHRI A. K. KULKARNI : . .. What right the Supreme Court Judges have to speak (Interruptions.) about the midnight order ? SHRI A. G. KULKARNI : Sir, on a point of order. The hon. Minister has not replied to My second point is will the Government my positive query : Will the Government also take into consideration the usages, the consider the peace move initiated by the letter and the statement issued by the Maharaja Maharaja of Darbhanga ? of Dhrangadhra and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh ? It is a very clever move to induce the MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : He Government into negotiations. But these negotiations should not be carried out. The has replied. Government will do away with bringing SHRI A. G. KULKARNI : He has not said forward before Parliament a new move to 'yes' or 'no'. . . abolish the privy purse in this session. Unless this is done these Maharajas will serve lollipop (Interruptions.) socialism in this country for ever. SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : The Government's position is very clear on this point. We have taken a deci- 105 Calling Attention to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970 j of urgent public importance 106 sion to abolish th( privy purses, but alongwith Minister who presides over it has taken in that an assurance is also given that some transitory arrangements will be made. . . good grace the defeat ? (Interruptions.) (Interruptions) SHRI BHUPE'H GUPTA: No transitory MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : I arrangemants. What transitory arrangements ? have already appealed to Members not to No. interrupt and if the Members interrupt, I will SHRI RAM NIVAS MIRDHA : In have to adjourn at 1 P.M. and I will not bother whether the Members get a chance or not. I do the context of tb.se decisions, any suggestions not want any interruptions from either side. coming from any quarters which would help n Let Mr. Misra continue. implementing this decision, would be welcome. (Interruptions) SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : I was asking SHRIMATI I> DIRA GANDHI : whether the Prime Minister— unless I repeat The hon. Member referred to the midnight it, the deaf people do not hear it— and if there order. I wot Id like to point out that the is interruption, I have told you repeatedly, Govemm> nt works night and day. . . there would be replies definitely. (lnterr prions.) (Interruptions) SHRI LOKNA H MISRA : I am happy to listen aNout the justification of the May I know whether the Prime Minister midnight o der, given by the Prime Minister. considers it or would take it in good grace She accepts that it was a midnight oi ler ... even if the judgment has gone against her, and rightly so? They have called it a midnight (Interruptions.) decision or order of the President and the Prime Minister and her Government were MR. DEPUTY ( HAIRMAN : Please ask responsible for misdirecting, misleading the your questions. President so that he had to ultimately sign it because he was guided by the advice of the SHRI LOKAN vTH MISRA : I have three Government I am not asking for the or foui specific questions to ask. I would lot resignation of the President. I said yesterday like to be interrupted by peopl from the other and I am saying today also. . . side... (Interrup ions). Alright, for you convenience, would relish interruptions. SHRI KOTA PUNNAIAH (Andhra Sir, I would lik to ask—No. 1 — whether Pradesh) : On a point of order. He says that the Govenment has taken this defeat. . . the Government pressurised the President to (Interniptions.) sign the document. He is repeating the aspersion against the President which is not SHRI KALYAr- ROY (West Bengal) : Is allowed. he talking about the disintegration of the ,'watantra Party in Gujarat ? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Please proceed, Mr. Misra. SHRI LOKAN/ TH MISRA : If it is disintegraing ii Gujarat, it is not trying, to merge with the Congress (R) as the CPI SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : The fellows are doing all the time. We hate ti President is the custodian of the Constitution merge with the Congress (R). and if he goes wrong, he wUl be subject to impeachment by this House. Therefore I have SHRI KALYAN ROY : You have been every right as I am one of his electors, to say swallowed by the Jan Sangh. whatever I feel. There is so much of interruptions that I am going off the track. We SHRI LOKAN \TH MISRA : The are generous people in the Opposition and if gentleman who is already in the belly of the the Prime Minister admits that she committed Congress (R) is shouting : 'You are being a mistake, as I said yesterday, we shall pardon swallowed'. What an irony! May I know this Government and will not demand for its whether the Government of India and the resignation. But they will have to admit that Prime they committed a mistake. I want to know whether she would admit that she had committed 107 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 108
[Shri Lokanath Misra.] SHRI AWADHESHWAR PRASAD SINHA : All the same it amounts to a a mistake in recommending to the President reflection on the Members of the House. that the midnight order should be passed. SHRI LOKANATH MISRA: But the SHRI KALYAN ROY : Is he making a Congress Party members show less courage speech ? when they make comments here on the Judges in the absence of ll\e Judges of the Supreme SHRI LOKANATH MISRA: He should Court. Now, therefore, I would ask, because have only listened to his leader—his Russian- there has been a definite response from the inspired leader— in order to take the example. rulers' side, whether the Prime Minister would Secondly, now that the judgment from the now think it desirable to have bilateral court has come, would the Prime Minister let decisions... us know what she is going to do so far as the implementation part of it is concerned? Would HON. MEMBERS : No, no. the Comptroller and Auditor-General be SHRI A. G. KULKARNI : No. immediately advised to restore the privy purses and would the Chief Secretaries of the SHRI LOKANATH MISRA: Mr. Kulkarni different State Governments be advised to is not the Prime Minister, unfortunately, in restore the privileges of the princes this country. If a co-operative man would immediately? How soon would she do it? That have been the Prime Minister, the country is number two. Number three. would have gone to ruin.
MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : How many SHRI K. S. CHAVDA : Why do you say points ? 'unfortunately' ? It is 'fortunately'. SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : Three SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : I am asking questions only. the Prime Minister whether she would think MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : So this is that the time has come for the purpose, the last question. whether, when the other party is responsive, she would think of having bilateral talks with SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : Number the princes. . . three ; in view of the positive response from AN HON. MEMBER : Never. the spokesman of the rulers that they are prepared to have talks with the Government— SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : . . . and have because they are also people with great a bilateral decision, instead of a hasty sacrifices to their credit, (Interruptions) unilateral decision which might ultimately sacrifices much more than the sum total of the lead. . . sacrifices of this entire House. . . SHRI C. D. PANDE (Uttar Pradesh) : HON. MEMBERS : No, no. Against the wishes of Parliament. SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : Yes, yes, SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : . . . to because they have sacrificed their territory and another predicament. they have merged their territories into the Union of India. Therefore, ... SHRIMATI INDIRA GANDHI : I SHRI AWADHESHWAR PRASAD do not consider this to be a predicament or a SINHA (Bihar) : Mr. Lokanath Misra's defeat. In the speech which I made when I was remark is a reflection on the Members of this introducing this Bill here I stated clearly that House and I would like him to withdraw this we expect obstacles at every step in our march remark. towards progress, towards bringing about a better life for our people, towards bringing SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : If any about greater equality among our people. reflection on the Chief Justice of the Supreme What is astonishing today is not what we Court is not taken as a reflection, Mr. might be feeling, but the reaction of those who Awadheshwar Prasad Sinha, you should not consider themselves the victors, why are they lose your head if somebody makes a comment so excited and upset ? That is what I am in his presence, and I have the courage to wondering. make a comment in your presence. 109 Calling AttentU n to a matter \ 16 DEC. 1970 ] of urgent public importance 110
SHRI S. N. MSHRA : Who is upset? Secondly, in view of the observations made in the Golaknath case would the SHRIMATI NDIRA GANDHI : This is Government give a second thought about the the imsression that we get from your sneecV Fundamental Rights Chapter in the It is writ large on your face. I can see this. Constitution? The second point is whether we shall send Thirdly, may I know from the Gov- instructions to the States and various people. ernment whether they would apply the I think that this point is covered by the T constitutional provision to increase the answer .a.'n t some time ago, so also is the number of Judges of the Supreme Court so poin regarding bilateral talks. Both these ;, that the existing structure of the Supreme points have been covered. We ha e to look Court does not stand in the way of bringing into all aspects of the judgment and this will progressive legislation by Parliament? take time. Then there was something said about sacrificj. Sir, I think the House itself SHRIMATI INDIRA GANDHI : can judge how seriously this point can be We have already said that so, far as this taken. When we compare the sacri ices, what matter is concerned we will take the does it mean ? The terr rory belonged to the appropriate constitutional measures. people. Were th! people of India slaves of these people ? Were the people of the print MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Goray. ely States not citizens of India ? What does it mean, that they gave up terrtory ? SHRI N. G. GORAY (Maharashtra) : Sir, I look at this judgment of the Supreme Court. SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : I did SHRI M. M. DHARIA: Sir, those who not say that anyb >dy was the slave of have given this motion should get a chance. another. Was it nc f a sacrifice mat tney made ? SHRI CHITTA BASU : (West Bengal) : Yes, Sir; We should also be called. SHRIMATI IT.DIRA GANDHI : MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : We are May be you have that view, but it is not our following the procedure of one from each view at ail. {Interruptions) To say that lakhs party being given the chance. There are other anc lakhs of people. . . {Interruptions) I an parties why are not in the list. not yielding. To equate these peopl with the lakhs and lakhs of people v ho sacrificed SHRI M. M. DHARIA: I can understand their lives and their all during the freedom your calling the leaders of the various parties movement, I think this is sacrilege and but those who are interested and who have desecration of the history of India. given notice of this motion should get a chance. SHRT PRANA i KUMAR MUKHERJEE (West Bengali): Unfortunately a situation >as MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : I am not arisen in which two constitutional nachinery, giving any assurance. I am following the the Supreme Court and tie Parliament, have procedure. come face to face. We should not forget that the Supreme Court has also to discharge its SHRI M. M. DHARIA : In that case we cons itutional obligations and for having di: shall have to insist on our right to get the charged its obligations conferred up< n it by chance. the Constitution it should not be criticised on the floor of the House Again Parliament, MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : We have being the sovereign legislature of the already taken 50 minutes. country, has every right to pass any legislation to do away any outmoded system SHRI M. M. DHARIA: But Mif. Deputy and in iew of that mav I know from the Chairman, ... Government whether the Government would examine all the existing provisions of the MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN ; I have Constitution and find out how to get rid of called Mr. Goray. I cannot give any the present situation? assurance. I have made very clear in the beginning that if you interrupt and engage yourselves in interruptions I would not be able to accommodate a 111 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA 1 of urgent public importance 112
[Mr. Deputy Chairman.] large number of I pronouncement of the judgment quash ing the Presidential Order derecognising Members. (.Interruptions) I have no Princes. This has been given an objection; I can adjourn the House at 1 adjective 'midnight' order. In this con o'clock and after reassembling we can discuss nection I want to remind you that our this same question. I am not worried at all but independence is also a midnight in is it the desire of the House that we should go dependence. We should not forget on discussing the same matter? that it started only in the midnight of I am prepared to follow the instructions of 14th August, 1947. As we are the the House. lawmakers here, the courts are law- interpreters there. For every judgment SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes,yes. there is scope for appeal. For an appeal against the Supreme Court there is a MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Let me ! court of appeal, that is the court of the know the wishes of the House. Now Mr. I people. I would like to know ______Goray. I SHRI LOKANATH MISRA : They 1 SHRI N. G. GORAY: In view of the fact would abolish you with it. that the Government have stated their position that they will take some time to study the MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN : Please judgement I would like to confine my put your question. question to two aspects. One is I would like to know whether the Government looks at this SHRI THILLAI VILLALAN: I would judgement as a water-shed between the days like to know from this Government whether it of privileged society and the society of free would be going to the court of appeal, that is, and equal people that we want to create and the court of the 1 people, as the last step or therefore whether the Government when they whether it is J going to take the immediate step come to certain decision will see to it that this of am-j ending the Constitution or any perpetual hindrance of the interpretations of other i interim arrangement. I would like to property rights will be removed once for all. know that first. Secondly, I would like to have clarification on this point. There are so Secondly I would like to know whether this many steps for the delivery of progress in power of Parliament to legislate on any issue this country. If we read the pages of of public importance without any hindrance world history we can see that the delivery of from the Supreme Court will be restored to progress is always painful. Our Mother India Parliament when the Government will think of is pregnant ] with the child of progress, but it new measures in the light of the Supreme re-I quires sometimes a surgical operation ! Court judgement. also. I would like to know from the ; (iovernment whether it is prepared to have a SHRIMATI INDIRA GANDHI: 1 do not surgical operation by an amendment of the think, Sir, that it is right to use the word Constitution or whether it will go 'hindrance'. The Constitution is clear and I straightway to the people, the court of the think we can proceed according to the people, to get their final decision on this. Constitution but the Constitution, as we have said and as other Members have said on SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA: The various occasions, is not a static thing. The hon. Member wants to know what con- Constitution has been changed in other sequential steps the Government propose to countries, it has been changed in our country take after the judgment of the Supreme too and if it is necessary to change it in the Court. The first consequential step is to people's interest certainly we should do so and study the judgment and whatever next needs Government will think about it . to be done, whether legally or administratively, will be done after a proper SHRI THILLAI VILLALAN (Tamil study of the judgment. Nadu) : With great respect to the Supreme SHRI A. D. MANI (Madhya Pradesh): Court, I want clarifications from this May 1 ask the Prime Minister about an Government about the consequential steps to incidental aspect of the matter and that is be taken after the whether the midnight order, which has been struck down by the Supreme Court, was passed on the advice of the Attorney- General, who is 113 Calling Attent -m to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970] of urgent public importance 114 a statutory officer under the Constitution? I ing reaffirmation of the fact that neither the have got a right to ask the question because Government of India nor even the President is the Attorney-General has a statutory position. above the Constitution. However, I would like He has misled the Governn ent and asked it to to invite the attention of the Government to pass an order w tich has been declared null one specific aspect of the judgment, a brief re- and void b/ the Supreme Court. Secondly, view of which has appeared in the Press today, may I ask her whether, in view of the fact 'hat and that is a dissenting judgment by Justice the Supreme Court has held, by implication, at Mitter in which he has said that "if ever there least two Judges have said so, that privy was a case for the President to make a purses are private property, the Government reference to this Court the present was would assess what the country will have to eminently suited to the purpose." Not only that pay as compensation? If the compensation he has virtually held the President guilty of amour t is very high, may 1 know whether it dereliction of duty. He has said, I quote, would not be desirable, as has beei the "when disputes of such public importance were practice of the Government in his matter in the agitating the minds of the Members of past, to negotiate a stitlement with the Princes Parliament and the Cabinet, it was not only his in a proper way, so that we also move a right but his duty to consult the Court." I think constitutional amendment removing the that this is very serious. We have been articles guaranteeing it in the Constitution ? repeatedly asking the Government that on The third point is, there have been many issues of this kind it would be proper to suggestions made that the Constitution should consult the Supreme Court. You will recall be amended. I quite agr?e that no Constitution that on this particular issue of Privy Purses is sacrosanct, bu: if you want to amend the also we had suggested that the Supreme Court Constitution, the State Assemblies also must should be consulted before any step was taken. be consulted. It cannot be decided at the C But deliberately the Government has been antral level, because we are developing a advising the President not to do so. Why? My regional" pattern of politics in this :ountry and other question in this regard is, confronted the States have got to be onsulted in this with the situation arising out of the judgment matter. about which the hon. Minister has just now SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA: The hon. stated that the Government would come to the Mem ier has asked if the Attorney Gener il House with a considered decision. I would like advised the Government in a particular way. to know whether Government was willing to Well, I think it is not very lair to ask the learn from its present experience. Two or three Government as to who advised them and alternatives have been mooted as to what what. should be done in this situation. One suggestion is that a Bill should be brought SHRI A. D. MANI : He is paid by us. immediately before this House in this very session. Another suggestion is that we should SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA: If you call a special session of Parliament to pass have any legal doubt, you can go and ask him. such a Bill. The third suggestion is that we Simply because he is a constitutional authority should go to the electorate for this particular and he can come and speak befoie the House, purpose, for this issue. I feel that this it does not mean that we should disclose all judgment of Justice Mitter—this is a that he says. He is legal adviser to the Government ai d Government has got all sorts dissenting judgment, dissenting on other of leg tl advice available to it after considera grounds, namely, of jurisdiction, but ion of which decision was taken. substantially endorsing the majority judgment—this particular judgment makes it SHRI A. D. MANI: What about the other incumbent on the Government first to consult specific question, whether they are prepared the Supreme Court on whatever course it wants to consider not to rule out a negotiated si to adopt. My submission is that the approach ttlement? in this regard should not be only political. Politics necessarily comes in, I admit it but SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA: I have grave constitutional and legal issues are already answered. involved in the whole situation, whether it is SHRI LAL K. ADVANI (Delhi): The in regard to bringing in a fresh Bill or whether Supreme Court's judgment is a vindication of it is in regard to advising the President to democracy and a refresh- dissolve the 115 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 116
[Shri Lai K. Advani.] hands of the Government? If there is no case before the Supreme Court our Bill would have Lok Sabha. I hold that the head of a minority proceed in that session or this session. What is Government has no right in a situation of this there to prevent the onward march of the kind to advise dissolution. But I submit for the legislation on the amendment Bill which was consideration of Government, and I would be before this House? happy if I get an answer, whether the Government is prepared to consult the SHRIMATI INDIRA GANDHI: Supreme Court on two issues: (1) dissolution All Mr. Advani's questions are covered by the of Lok Sabha; (2) on the new Bill proposed. replies which I have given earlier that we shall Some friends have referred to the Golaknath consider our future action. But I must make it case 1. P.M. which is indeed very pertinent. In clear that obviously the hon. Member's view view of the decision in the Golak Nath case, of democracy and the world's view—I am not any Bill that you propose to bring forward saying mine—are entirely different; the view now or even Mr. Nath Pai's Bill, they also held, for instance, in the USA and in other need to be examined by the Supreme Court countries is entirely different from what he has first before you take a decision. expressed here. In the USA such a crisis took place earlier. The question is: What is the Sir, the hon. Minister has just now said that Constitution for? What are laws for? Laws are it is not proper for the Government to reveal not dropped from the heavens; laws are made who has advised what, particularly with to make life more orderly for the people who reference to the Attorney-General. I think that live in this country. The Constitution is made it is a wrong stand to take. This House will so as to have better functioning. Laws are recall that on an earlier occasion when we made by Parliament. Therefore it is possible to demanded that the Attorney-General's advice change the laws, it is possible to change the in respect of nationalisation of the sugar Constitution. This is obvious—democracy industry in UP should be placed on the Table must mean the right of fhe largest number of of the House, it was duly placed on the Table the people. . . {Interruptions.) of the House. It is but proper that on an important issue of this kind, we should know MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order, order. what the Attorney-General has advised. And I SHRIMATI INDIRA GANDHI: think that it is the advice of this nan which has Whether you talk of the Fundamental Rights landed the Government and the President in or any other right, it does not mean that you soup on this issue. He should either resign or can suppress the rights of some people for the he should be dismissed. sake of the rights of some of other people. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Prime This is evident in democracy. Minister. So far as the Attorney-General is SHRI SASANKASEKHAR SANYAL concerned, to the implication of the question (West Bengal): Sir, on a point of order, before asked by Shri Mani was whether because we the Prime Minister speaks. Are we forgetting had followed the Attorney-General's advice, the fact that neither Parliament was a party in and because of this, we went wrong. My that case nor the other fact that the colleague had spoken of this. I should like to Constitution (Amendment) Bill was the issue repeat that the Government and I take full there? Therefore, we are arguing as if we are responsibility for the decision. I do not want to bound by the decision. . . hide behind the Attorney-General or anybody else. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: What is your point of order? AN HON. MEMBER: Therefore, she should resign. SHRI SASANKASEKHAR SANYAL : This is the point of order. SHRI GODEY MURAHARI: In the first place, let me make it clear that I completely MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: There is no disagree with the attitude taken by my friend. point of order. Mr. Mishra, and also the other friend on this question. {Interruption.) SHRI SASANKASEKHAR SANYAL: Why should they hold up the 117 Calling Attrition to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970] of urgent public importance 118
SHRI S. N MISHRA : What attitude? body who suggests that the Constitution be changed, that the fundamental rights SHRI GODEY MURAHARI: It is guaranteeing the right to property be changed. very clear that it is an obstructive attitude. Mr. We are one with them. Of course, let me Deauty Chairman, with the obstructive att tude make it clear that we are against any that Mr. Mishra and Mr. Tyag have taken, I amendment of the other fundamental rights. disagree. We are fully seized of this affair. It Therefore, I would like the Government to is an impurtan. issue—the country paying come forward with a new Constituent crores of rupees to the Princes. And if Assembly. We will be making a demand for a something gees wrong, if the Government had new Constituent Assembly all the time, and passed an order derecognising the Princes anl even today if the Government is prepared for their privileges and if the Supreme C iurt in its a new Constituent Assembly, we are wisdom thinks it fit to vacate that order, then, prepared for it. Sir, it is Parliament which is seized of the SHRI M. M. DHARIA : Under what affair, and I di not see any reason why article? anybody shoul I be obstructive in this matter. That i; why I said that I disagree with him . . SHRI GODEY MURAHARI: Article or no article. The people are the article. If the SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Nobody is people want a new Constituent Assembly they obstructing. will have it irrespective of any Government. Even if this Government stands in the way of SHRI GODI Y MURAHARI: Everybody that demand there will be a revolution and a knows who was obstructing and who was not new Constituent Assembly will come in the ibstructing. I need not elaborate on t al country. Therefore, do not talk of articles and all that. As far as the new Constituent SHRI S. N. MISHRA: We know where you Assembly is concerned, it will take its own stand. course. Theretore, may I know from the Gov- ernment in the first place the concrete steps SHRI GO! EY MURAHARI: I the Government would take to see that this know where w: stand. You need not tell me Constitutional amendment is effected about that because that it be very clear in I few forthwith? Also I would (ike the Government days where we stand. Everybody knows where to give us an assurance that they shall not we stand. Why si oiild you talk about it. And. negotiate with the Princes over the payment Mr. Mis ira, it does not pay to get irritated lik of huge amounts as compensation because that? that is what is being contemplated. I may make it very clear that we will be opposing SHRI S. N. vlISHRA: Why are you not any move to give them any compensation. issuing directives against that... SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA: The hon'ble Member has again given certain SHRI GODI Y MURAHARI: Why do you suggestions that there should be no not war ? I would like to make our stand very compensation or interim relief. clear on that question. If the Govern nent were to take any action derecogr ising the Princes, SHRI GODEY MURAHARI: I denying them any c nt of compensation, we wanted an assurance from the Government are with the < iovernment in spite of anybody that the Government will not pay any else. But if the Government goes on paying compensation. . . orores of rupees or even lakhs of rupee by way (Interruption.) of compensation or interim relief, we shall MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please listen oppose that also. As far as we are concerned, to the reply. our stand is tha: these Princes have been exploiting the :ommon people of this country SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : . .. As and thr people who have lived in their States. regards the Constitutional amendment about It is not a conferred right on them; it is an ex- which the hon'ble referred, as I said earlier, vnrte right which they eslablished on the Government be-lives even in the property themselves. Therefore, I w >uld be one with right with certain limitations. And as regards any- other rights, of course, we are fully in agreement with the hon'ble Member that they should not be tampered with. 119 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 120
SHRI A. D. MANI: Shall not be tampered reme Court—that the Government was with. accustomed to functioning both during day SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA: That is and night. what I was saying, Mr. Mani. SHRI KALYAN ROY: The High Court MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Why does not function during day also. do you interrupt, Mr. Mani? He does not SHRI S. N. MISHRA: One of the need your help. Please keep quiet. hon. allies of the Government, i.e., an SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : As I said hon. Member of the D.M.K. said that earlier, we will take into consideration what we got independence during midnight. I the hon'ble Member has said. do not think that the midnight Inde pendence, with capital T, gives freedom to the Prime Minister to act as she SHRI S. N. MISHRA : Mr. Deputy likes during midnight. Now, Sir ------Chairman, we are neither in the category of all-wise persons who know everything about SHRI M. M. DHARIA: No, Mr. Deputy the judgment even without reading it, nor are Chairman. Let Mr. Mishra behave properly. we in the category of those who have browsed {Interruptions) it is most unbecoming of the through the 400 pages and would like to hon. Member. (Interruptions) rush.to certain conclusions. SHRI S. N. MISHRA: What is the Sir, I can appreciate the statement of the objection? Why are you objecting? Government that it would require more time to After all, my hon. friend, study the judgment before it can give reply to Mr. Dharia . . . the points raised by us. One thing which seemed to justify in the minds of the hon'ble MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please put Members a discussion of this nature was that your questions. they were simply seeking to analyse the effects produced by the judgment. Even there my SHRI S. N. MISHRA: Yes. But if submission is that the effects produced by the something is said by hon. Members, I am judgment cannot be analysed unless we have bound to take note of it. (Interruptions) Sir, gone through the judgment. That would be a we have seen that midnight missiles were sent foolhardy way of going about it. (Interruption) to the Congress President during the days of But I must take note of your midnight the split. We have been accustomed to certain performance. So, Sir, my humble submission is midnight performances. that this voluminous judgment, extending over 400 pages, would require to be more carefully MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please come studied, closely scrutinised and seriously to your questions. pondered. Now, Sir, my another submission SHRI S. N. MISHRA: Yes, I am coming to would be that you should be good enough to that. You had given perfect liberty to all ask the Government to circulate a copy of the others. judgment—that is, all the judgments— to all the Members before we can form our own Now, this order was promulgated .during views on this. This is particularly necessary in midnight. It becomes important, Mr. Deputy view of the fact that this House has discussed Chairman, because we still have doubts the executive order that was promulgated in whether the President had accorded his assent defiance of the opinion of this hon. House. to the Cabinet's decision in a proper manner. I And this hon. House had raised the point of had carried on some correspondence with the contempt of the House also. Therefore, it President on the subject. Now that the becomes incumbent on the Chair to ask the judgment has been delivered, I am going to Government to supply us with a copy of the release that correspondence with the President judgment. on whether the assent was properly accorded and whether it was accorded on a written Now, Sir, the hon. Prime Minister was decision of the Cabinet. I have still my pleased to say—and she was saying it in a doubts, and the President will be fair to us moment of exasperation, probably with if he reference to the hon. Sup- j takes us into confidence on whether it was done in a proper manner because i it related to certain decisions of the House overriding which the President 121 Callin? Attem'on to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970] of urgent public importance 122 had been made to issue that order. Mr. Deputy SHRI S. N. MISHRA: If the Prime Chairman, one thing which is very much in Minister is not pleased to be present in this our minds is that since there seems to )e House, we are bound to take notice of it. . . almost a consensus that there should be abolition of the privy purses, oi r basic task SHRI S. D. MISRA : It is an insult. our constructive task, n.nv would be to see that it is done ir a proper constitutional SHRI M. M. DHARIA: No, Mr. manner. And wiiat is the way to do it? That is Deputy Chairman, the Leader of the a coistructive task on which we can give oui Opposition himself does not show any respect advice to the Government and the C to the Prime Minister. . . overnment also should seek our advice on MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please sit that. It has to be done in a prope: down, Mr. Dharia; it is very bad; do not constitutional manner. That the Gove nment interrupt every now and then. has come ultimately to realise under the shock of the judgment delive ed by the Supreme SHRI M. M. DHARIA: The Leader of the Court. This is the clarification that I want, Opposition has lost all sense of proportion. . . whether he Government wants to bring it aboi t in the proper constitutional manner. Does the SHRI S. N. MISHRA: I am not yielding to Government contemplate ho ling consultations anybody, Mr. Deputy Chairman. . . on this subject with the political parties so that this is done in the right manner? (Interruptions by Shri A. G. Kurkarni) SHRI BHUPF SH GUPTA: Not with you. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please sit down, Mr. Kulkarni. Do not interrupt. SHRI S. D. MISRA: Yes, only with the CPI. SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: Only with those who supported it, not with those who votec against the Bill.
SHRI LOKANATH MISRA: You are in MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order, order the pock t of the Government. please.
SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: Not at all with SHRI S. N. MISHRA: Sir, my the lobby of the princes. honourable friend, Shri Bhupesh Gupta, said that the Prime Minister should not MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Mishra, consult all other parties. All right, I you ploase continue. wish him to be the only party to be consulted. I would not grudge it ------SHRI S. N. MISHRA: Sir, I find that the Prime Vfinister has vacated her seat now. . . (// erruptions.) SHRI S. D. MISRA : How insulting and damaging .i is!
SHRI M. M. DHARIA: When the Leader of the Opposition himself does not show any (Interruption.) respect, does not have any decorum, for tie Prime Minister, why should we respect him? SHRI S. N. MISHRA: Although we know that on many important occa SHRI S. N. MISHRA: I am not yielding. sions it is only my honourable friend, (Inten uptions) I am not yielding. I am on Shri Bhupesh Gupta, who is consulted, my feet.. we have never made any grievance of it. I was asking the Government------MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order, order (Interruptions by Shri Sheel Bhadra please. Yajee) 123 CzMng Attention to a matter [ RAJ YA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 124
have to be ratified by 50 per cent or more than 50 per cent of the State legislatures. That does not occur in the Constitution at the present moment. That menns that the Bill also recognises the fact that it cannot be done on the basis of the existing provisions of the Constitution. So, it would not help us in this respect. Even so, I would like to know the opinion of the government in this matter whether it wants to proceed with Shri Nath Pai's Bill with regard to the amendment of SHRI S. N. MISHRA: I was asking whether Part III of the Constitution. the Government proposes to consult the political parties with regard the constructive SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : Of all the task that lies ahead of us. (Interruption by Shri things that the hon. Member has said, only Bhupesh Gupta) You are such a dunce that I some which are relevant, will be given due cannot make you understand. The second thing consideration. about which I would like to ask the government is this: A suggestion has been made that the SHRI K. CHANDRASEKHARAN Bill standing in the name of an hon. Member of (Kerala): Mr. Deputy Chairman, the hon. the other House—Shri Nath Pai—should be Minister of State has stated that the proceeded with. May I submit that that Bill is a government stand committed to the abolition self-defeating measure which concedes the of rulership. I join the chorus of welcome that thesis of the hoji. Supreme Court that the has been given to that statement by large Parliament does not have the authority to sections of this House because that statement is amend Part III of the Constitution. . . good so far as it goes. But except that particular part, I do not find anything by way SHRI SHEEL BHADRA YAJEE of a positive suggestion or a clear indication (Bihar): Parliament is supreme to the and I am sorry to state that the statement is Supreme Court. bald and blank, even though what was pronounced yesterday was expected for some MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please do not time past. The confusion has, according to me, interrupt. become more on account of a statement made by the hon. State Minister today that he would SHRI S. D. MISRA : We would like Shri like to make it clear that government is not Yajee to speak first, instead of giving sermons. opposed to property rights as such. I do not know what exactly that statement means. The twin aspects of the decision of the Supreme SHRI SHEEL BHADRA YAJEE: I can give Court may be summed up as, firstly, that the you sermons. abolition of privy purse cannot be done by executive action, and secondly, clear indications are there in at least the judgments of two of the honourable ludges that the abolition of privy purse and rulership involve rights in relation to property as secured by SHRI S. N. MISHRA: There are Articles 19 and 31 of the Constitution of India. Constitutional remedies to the problems that we are confronted with. But there is no So, Sir, the Supreme Court has made it clear Constitutional remedy so far as the actions of that this could be done only by way of a certain hon. Members are concerned. Anyway, Constitutional amendment and in the course of I would like to proceed with my contention. seeking clarifications today, hon. Members With regard to Shri Nath Pai's Bill, I was have suggested that firstly, the Bill that was saying that the Bill is self-defeating in the there formerly should be pursued once over sense that it concedes the thesis of the again in both Houses of Parliament and, honourable Supreme Court that on the basis of secondly, the enabling provisions contained in the existing provisions of the Constitution, the the Bill of Shri Nath Pai to amend Article 363 Parliament of India has no right to amend Part of the Constitution should also be pursued. III of the Constitution. There a substantive May I state, Sir, that even these two actions by proviso is introduced that it will 125 Calling Attention to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970] of urgent public importance 126 this Parliament may not be adequate to meet would think in terms of amending all these the requirements of the judgment of the provisions of the Constitution. Supreme Court for, unless Articles 19 and 31 of the Constitution are drastically amended SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA: Sir, the and the rights in relation to private property in House would appreciate that it is not possible certain sections are reduced, if not taken away, for the Government to say anything definite at it will be impossible to remove the obstacles this stage because of the time that it will take about wl ich the hon. Prime Minister has beei to study the judgment and come to proper stating so much. There is no use ol criticising conclusions and, as regards the suggestions the judgments of the Supreme Court or the made by the hon. Member, all those High Courts. My submission, Sir, is that they suggestions are in our view and would be are not ii the wrong and they are applying the given due consideration. provisions of the Constitution. The Art cles of the Constitution, as they stand today, the SHRI SUNDAR SINGH BHANDARI Constitutional provisions, ; re not in tune with (Rajasthan): I think he can have a taperecorder the modern social stic approaches that this which will go on saying "It will be given due Government nd this Parliament desire. consideration". Sir, the Constitu ion has been modelled MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dharia. largely on thi provisions of the Government of India Act of 1935 which itself was outmodel SHRI M. M. DHARIA: Mr. Deputy when the Constitution was framed. It may be Chairman, Sir, the judgment on the Golak necessary to work out a second Constitution Nath case, the judgment on the bank for this country. It i undoubtedly necessary to nationalisation case and the judgment on the work out crastic amendments to the privy purses issue by the Supreme Court have Constitution an \ unless these amendments are made it very clear, with due respect to their made, i:iay I submit to and tell the Governmer Lordships of the Supreme Court, that their t, Sir, that it will not be possible for us to judgments and rulings have created obstacles proceed with any socialistic executiv in the way of social and economic changes in measures. this country.
MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please put Sir, having regard to the impediments, the question. may I know from the Government whe ther the Government were treating this SHRI K. CHANDRASEKHARAN: Sir, House of Parliament, both Houses of may I know Irom the Government whether Parliament, as the Constituent Assem they wot Id seriously think of amending bly, not being bullied by the idea that Articles 19 and 31 of the Constitution so tlat a separate Constituent Assembly will be convened, because there is no provision the large amount of compensation hat whatsoever in the Constitution. But, otherwise will necessarily have t i be paid to under Article 368______the rulers if rulership nd the privy purses are to be abolishi i could be avoided? No doubt. . . SHRI SUNDAR SINGH BHANDARI: Who is bullying? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: That is all right. SHRI M. M. DHARIA: Please try to listen. I am not speaking. from a passionate point of SHRI K. CHANDRASEKHARAN: No view, but I am speaking from a dispassionate doubt, the Gcvernment have stated that point of view. I hope due consideration will transitional payments will be made. But be given by Shri Bhandari. transitional payments cannot be avoided when compensation under Article 31. . . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bhandari, please _____ MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: That will be enough. No speech now, please. SHRI M. M. DHARIA: Under Article 368, no sooner than any legislation is before the SHRI K. CHANDRASEKHARAN: House to amend thg Constitution, because of "Sir, I want a clarification from the the restrictions we turn ourselves into a •Government wheher the Government Constituent Assembly. Otherwise, under Article 100, it is by a simple bare majority to pass that legislation. So, under these circums- 127 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA ] of urgent public importance 128
[Shri M. M. Dharia.] necessary amendment of the Constitution. When 1 say a special Session, it is not only to tances, let us affirm our right to amend the do away wjth the privy purses but also to Constitution including the Fundamental Rights assert ourselves that we are a supreme body and let us not be a victim of the jundgment in and we can amend the Constitution, to assert the Golak Nath case. Let us make it very clear ourselves that there cannot be a right to that this judgment of the Supreme Court on the property beyond prescribed ceilings, to assert privy purses has again created one more ourselves that we are here for a social change, obstacle, as the view expressed by some and if any impediments are created from nay learned judges is that privy purses are also quarter, let us go to the people, if necessary. . . properties. If it is a property, then the right to (Interruptions.) property is a fundamental right and naturally it cannot be amended because of the judgment in SHRI RAM NIWAS NIRDHA : As I said the Golaknath's case. In these circumstances, it earlier, the Government believes in legal, is high time that the Government say to the personal right of property of the citizens of country that^ beyond certain prescribed limits, India and also in the other fundamental rights the right to property shall not be a fundamental that our citizens are enjoying. But as regards right in this country. And we shall have a restrictions, certain reasonable restrictions social change. have to be imposed on them. We are constantly considering those things. The Sir, so far as this measure is concerned, I Government's policy is very clear in these was just listening to the cirti-cisms levelled by matters. The Government stands committed to many. Let us not forget the way in which the the abolition of privy purses and privileges at Supreme Court has unfortunately degraded ihe earliest possible time. . . itself. "The President is not a Moghul; the (Interruption.) president is not a Moghul Badshah; the SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Sir, on a point President is not a Crown. . ."—in these words of order. . . the they have criticized the President. . . (Interruptions.) (Interruptions.). Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I do believe that the Supreme Court should not SHRI K. S. CHAVDA : Unless you ask the be criticized. But at the same time it is neces- reporters not to record, Mr. Bhupesh Gupta sary that the Supreme Court judges should will not sit down. take care that they also do not cross the limits of dignity . . (Interruptions.) I do not want to SHRI A. P. CHATTERJEE (West Bengal) : Is it not a fact that in the course of the go to that level of the Supreme Court. . . arguments on the Princes matter the Supreme SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : We Court almost directly referred to the debates in should evolve a procedure for the removal the Pariia-ment as the sqables in Chandni of the judges. . . Chowk and that came out in the Press also and (Interruptions.) if that is so, what steps the Government do propose to take in regard to this serious SHRI M. M. DHARIA : We have the reflection on parliamentary debates and executive, we have the legislative, and we proceedings in the Supreme Court by the have the judicial wings. But let not the eleven Supreme Court Judges? Secondly, as far as the judges of the Supreme Court be under the Judges of the Supreme Court are concerned, is impression that they are here to decide the it not a fact that most of the Judges of the destiny of the whole country of the whole Supreme Court are drawn from classes which people. (Interruptions) really will create in them bias in favour of Sir, May I know from the hon. Government property and in favour of property rights? If that they will take into consideration all the that is so, does the Government propose to aspects? Let us go in a dispassionate way. We take any steps in regard to the conditions for want 10 implement the social objectives that recruitment of Judges to the Supreme Court so we have announced to the people. And, Sir, that the socialistic bias of the Judges may be from that point of view, either the properly tested and examined? Thirdly, our Government will think, if so necessary of Party has said often and some Members even extending this session or calling a special in this House raised objections ,to what our session of the Parliament for the leader said that this Constitution is a useless Cons- 129 Calling Attention to a matter [ 16 DEC. 1970] of urgent public importance 130 titution, it is a Constitution completely biased SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : I do not in favour of the privileged classes, in favour of believe, as the Member has said... the propertied classes, that this < onstitution has to be wrecked—that was the word used by SHRI A. P. CHATTERJEE : Had some of our lead :rs in the last one or two not Sardar Gurmukh Singh Musafir been sent years but tht t raised some objections in the outside, then also it might have been passed. minds of some Members and certainly in those About the DMK, on whose support Mrs. Benches. In view of this fact that this Gandhi depends, if that Party's Member had Constitution has so far become an unworkable also come here, then also things would have Constituion so far as socialism and socialistic been different. point of view is concerned it has become use- less so far as any step towards progress is concerned anc further because we have seen also th'.t the Supreme Court on the basis of 1 lis Constitution has struck down the Kerala SHRI A. P. CHATTERJEE : We Education Act, the Kerala Lane Reforms Bill, have seen it, how you had sent away Shri the Kerala University Act and other pro- Gurumukh Singh Musafir. We know what gressive measures, it is quite time now that the happened. Constitut] in has to be changed lock, stock and barrel, not merely Part III of the Constitution but other provisions also which ; re pernicious. Therefore the question now arises squarely before the Ruling Party as to what they are going to do vith this Constitution. If Mrs. SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : Sir, Indira Ga idhi's socialism is not soda water Government does not believe, as the hon. sociali m, as it looks like— soda water merely Member has said, that the Constitution is bubbles and froths— Mrs. Indira Gand ii useless and it has to be wrecked, but as the should take some steps in order to i ee that this Prime Minister has said, the Constitution has Constitution is changed a d is wrecked and a to evolve at times and it has to be one of the new Constitution e brought in so that the instruments for social progress. From that Constitution n ay give right to the people and point of view the Government has come, in may gi'e such provisions by which we can tal e the past also, when it thought it necessary to property from the propertied persons that we amend the Constitution, and in future also, if can take away the privilege from the privileged we think that it is necessary to do so, we will people. These are the question that are not hesitate to come for amendment of the squarely raised h\ the Supreme Court judgment Constitution. before t e people and before the Ruling Party. The test of the sincerity of the Rulinj Party, the SHRI JOACHIM ALVA : Has not this issue sincerity in their professior, will be determined come up before the Government, namely, that by their declarati in here and now whether they the present Bench-of the Supreme Court of are going to amend the Constitution and his India has not only proved impregnable, but should go lock, stock and barrel. reactionary and illiberal as well? Does the , Government think of appointing a new set of Judges? SHRI BHUPE >H GUPTA : My friend Mr. (Interruptions.) Chatte jee has made very good points. My only fear is at the time of the next voting he SHRI S. D. MISRA : More Kumar- may not absent himself... amangalams. {Inter uptions.) SHRI JOACHIM ALVA : Above-all, in the matter of appointing the new Chief Justice SHRI A. P. CHATTERJEE : Mr. when the present Chief Justice leaves, will the Bhupesh Gupta has been picked by the Government appoint the right person at the Congress Party as the soda water socialist. . . right time and in the right manner? Further I (Interruptions.) want to know whether Government's attention has been drawn to a very important Article in 5—64 R.S./70 the Indian 'National Herald' entitled 'Supreme Court Appointments' in its issue dated Novem- ber 29, 1970 (Interruptions.) It is
131 Calling Attention to a matter [ RAJYA SABHA] of urgent public importance 132
[Shri Joachim Alva.] very relevant editorial tion to make. So many suggestions were made by one of India's leading Editors, Mr. and the Government has been pleased to say at Chelapathi Rau. Please hear me. The every stage "in the name of the people", "in the quotation is from Mr. M. C. Setalvad, India's name of the people". May I suggest this to the most illustrious living lawyer. The quotation Government? Will it not be desirable to go to is not from me please : polls on this one question because there are two opinions on this question? One opinion is that "The Law Commission, presided over by the Fundamental Rights in the Constitution Mr. Setalvad in its Fourteenth Report, rejected cannot be changed by the present Parliament, the argument of seniority and of judicial and another opinion is that a Constituent experience, and said that 'it is necessary to set a Assembly should be convened if there were healthy convention that appointment to the any idea to change the Fundamental Rights. office of the Chief Justice rests on special con- Though many of my friends may not agree sideration and does not as a matter of course go with me, I am one with Mr. Dharia that even to the seniormost puisne Judge', and the Law the present Parliament can change the Commission then consisted of eminent lawyers Fundamental Rights. But that is neither here including Mr. S. M. Sikri, then Advocate- nor there. Now, will it not be desirable on the General, Punjab, and now in the Supreme part of the Government to go to polls on this Court, Mr. G. S. Pathak, then Advocate and one issue v-heiher the present Parliament can now the Vice-President and even Mr. Chagla, be given the right to change the Fundamental then Chief Justice of Bombay High Court and Rights in the Constitution? Shall this not be a now back at the Bar. What has happened since good point to go to polls tomorrow and seek then ?" They were the Members of the the verdict of the people, in whose name you Commission. Mr. Justice Sikri, whose go on saying things from morning till evening? judgment is also known in the other case, in the Take the verdict of the people and, if their ver- other well known case, namely, the Bank dict is favourable, then change the Nationalisation case, his connection with banks Constitution; 1 have no objection. Will has been alleged. I want to know whether all Government take this suggestion? As long as these people are going to become the Chief the present Constitution is there, you cannot Justices of India in succession in order to hold tamper with the property rights enshrined up the progress of India and the March of the therein. In the case of these Fundamental people of India, or we are going to follow the Rights it is the people's verdict that should other great democracy of the world, namely, count, and I think we should not abuse the the United States of America where President Judges for what they are doing according to the Roosevelt elbowed out all the illiberal and un- present Constitution. worthy Judges and put in new people and where even the present President Nixon tried to SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA : Suppose we throw out the illiberal people. Are we here make the reference whether privy purses similarly going to move with the times and act should be given to the princes or not? in the right manner and in the right way and see that the unpleasant Judges are left to take SHRIMATI YASHODA REDDY : I agree care of themselves and also see that the next even for that but privy purse is only one of the Chief Justice of India to be appointed is a many matters; we may be having many other patriotic man, a man of the masses, a man who things. Whether the right of changing the Fun- knows how to deliver the goods? damental Rights should be given to Parliament is the issue and would it not be desirable for MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN . It is the Government to go to the polls on this issue and take the people's verdict? a suggestion for action. Shrimati Yashoda Reddy. SHRI RAM NIWAS MIRDHA : SHRIMATI YASHODA REDDY: I do not The hon. Member has suggested that we should agree with Mr. Alva iu one thing, where he go to the polls on this question. Well, I can says that the Judges are wrong. The assure her that this suggestion would also be Constitution may be wrong; change the seriously considered. Constitution if you want. On that I have got one sugges-