Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Shri H.V. Pataskar: Sir, so far as the consideration of this article 144 is concerned, I only object to the manner in which it has been worded and I would make the following suggestion, if that will be acceptable to those who are responsible for this draft: "The Governor's ministers shall be appointed by him and shall hold office during his pleasure." This is pleased by article 143 and in that article a provision has been made that "there shall be a Council of Minister's". Naturally, therefore, we must mention as to who is to appoint this Council of Ministers. I think the better form would have been merely to mention that "the Council of Ministers shall be appointed by the Governor." At the same time to make a further provision that " they shall hold office during his pleasure," is undesirable. My opinion is it is not necessary and is derogatory to the position which we are going to give to the Prime Minister of the State and the Council of Ministers. Probably this provision is a remnant of the old idea that the Ministers hold office during the king's pleasure. Things have changed since then and it is not necessary that we should incorporate the same language, namely, "they shall hold office during his pleasure". I admit that if the Governor is the appointing authority, naturally he should have the power in certain circumstances for which provision may be should have the power in certain circumstances for which provision may be made in this section that the Council of Ministers may be dissolved or some new ministers shall be appointed, but, Sir, when we are making a provision with regard to the appointment of a Council of Ministers in the year of grace, 1949. we need not say that "they shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor." That "Governor" we have decided will be nominated by the President and i do not think it will be proper to say that the minister shall hold office during his pleasure. It may be asked, "What would happen if the ministers have to be changed"? The ministers should be changed only if they cease to command the confidence of majority of the members in the House and for that provision could be made in the Instrument of Instructions, but so far as article 144 reads now, I do not think it is proper that we should lay down that in the case of a Governor of the type which we have already decided upon the Council of Ministers shall be appointed by him and they shall hold office during his pleasure. This phraseology may have been taken out from some other constitutional books and as I said it is probably due to the fact that formerly as the powers of the ministers developed, they may have held office during the pleasure of the Crown, but now there is going to be no Crown and the wording of the article is not happy and proper and, therefore, I would appeal that this part of article 144 be taken out of the Constitution.

The amendment was negatived.
Mr. President: The question is :
'That clause (6) of article 144 be deleted."
The amendment was adopted.
Mr. President: The question is:
"That article 144, as amended, stand part of the Constitution.
The amendment was adopted.
Article 144, as amended, was added to the Constitution.
* New Article 144-A Mr. President: notice of an amendment has been received from Shri B. M. Gupta that a new article 144-A be put after article 144. It reads:
"That after article 144, the following new article be '144-A. In the States of Bihar, Central Provinces and Berar and Orissa, there shall be a minister in charge of tribal welfare, who may in additional be in charge of the welfare of the Scheduled Castes and backward classes or any other work.'"