DRAFT CONSTITUTION 607
would be no purpose served in discussing article 131 in either of its alternative forms. That would be my suggestion subject to your ruling in the matter.
Mr. President: There are several amendments which support the idea of election or appointment by President. The other amendments are regarding the method of election. First I want to get rid of the question of election so that all amendments relating to method of election will go. Then we can take up the question of appointment and the appointment in that case will be by the President.
Shri Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar (Madras : General): If the question of appointment or not is taken up first, that will automatically eliminate the election question. I agree with Dr. Ambedkar’s views in the matter.
- The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Bombay : General) : Mr. President, Sir after such a prolonged debate on the amendment I think it is quite unnecessary for me to take the time of the House in making any prolonged speech. I have risen only to make two things clear; one is to state to the House the exact co-relation between the two alternatives that have been placed by the Drafting Committee before the House and amendment No. 2015 which has been debated since yesterday. My second purpose is to state the exact issue before the House, so that the House may be able to know what it is that it is called upon to bear in mind in deciding between the alternatives presented by the Drafting Committee and the new amendment.
Sir, the first alternative that has been put by the Drafting Committee is an alternative which is exactly in terms of the decision made by this House some time ago in accordance with the recommendations of a Committee appointed to decide upon the principles governing the Provincial Constitution. The Drafting Committee had no choice in the matter at all, because according to the directions given to the Drafting Committee it was bound to accept the principle which had been sanctioned by the House itself. The question, therefore, arises : why is it that the Drafting Committee thought it tit to present an alternative ? Now, the reason why the Drafting Committee presented an alternative
- CAD, Vol. VIII, 31st May 1949, pp. 467-69