572 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
That is the sequence of events and it would be seen that article 81 is so framed as to fit in with this sequence. Even today, if I may say so, the same procedure is followed. The President (or the GovernorGeneral) appoints somebody when the House meets for the first time to preside over it. Every member then takes the oath or makes the affirmation before the presiding authority. After the oath is taken the presiding authority proceeds to conduct the election of the Speaker and when the election of the Speaker is completed, the person chosen as the presiding officer retires and the Speaker continues to occupy the place of the presiding officer with the authority of the President to administer the oath to any member who comes thereafter. Therefore, as I said, the original Draft is in keeping with the sequence of events and the provision which is usually made for the President to confer his authority on the Speaker will prevent the newly elected person from having to go to the President to take the oath.
Mr. President : Should it be necessary for the speaker to derive his authority to administer the oath from the President ?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I submit constitutionally, it is, because the administration of the oath is an incident in the constitution of the House, over which the Speaker has no authority…….
Mr. President: I am not thinking of that stage. I am thinking of a subsequent stage after the Speaker has been elected.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I think there is nothing wrong or derogatory, for the simple reason that the constitution of the House, its making up, the legal form of the House is a matter which is outside the purview of the Speaker. The Speaker is in charge of the affairs of the Parliament when the Parliament is constituted and the Parliament is not constituted unless the oath is taken by the members. Therefore the taking up of the oath is really a part and parcel of constituting the House in accordance with the provision and so far as that is concerned I think that auhtority does not belong to the Speaker and need not belong to the Speaker.
Mr. President: Supposing at a subsequent meeting of the House the Speaker happens to be absent and a new member comes on a day when the Deputy Speaker or some other person is in the Chair.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The authority given to the Speaker becomes vested not only in the Speaker but also in the Deputy Speaker, in the Panel of Chairmen or any other person occupying the Chair for the time being.