DRAFT CONSTITUTION 719
(3) Before each general election to the House of the People and to the Legislative Assembly of each State and before the first general election and thereafter before each biennial election to the Legislative Council of each State having such Council, the President shall also appoint after consultation with the Election Commission such Regional Commissioners as he may consider necessary to assist the Election Commission in the performance of the functions conferred on it by clause (1) of this article.
(4) The conditions of service and tenure of office of the Election Commisssioners and the Regional Commissioners shall be such as the President may by rule determine :
Provided that the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be removed from office except in like manner and on the like grounds as a judge of the Supreme Court and the conditions of the service of the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment:
Provided further that any other Election Commissioner or a Regional Commissioner shall not be removed from office except on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner.
(5) The President or the Governor or Ruler of a State shall, when so requested by the Election Commission, make available to the Election Commission or to a Regional Commissioner such staff as may be necessary for the discharge of the functions conferred on the Election Commission by clause (1) of this article.”
Mr. President : I have notice of a number of amendments, some in substitution of the articles 289,290 and 291 and some amendments to the amendments which are going to be moved. I think I had better take the amendments which are in the nature of substitution of these articles. Dr. Ambedkar has moved one. There is another amendment in the name of Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava.
Pandit Hirday Nath Kunzru (United Provinces : General) : May I ask, Sir, whether Dr. Ambedkar is not going to say anything in support of the proposition that he has moved ? It concerns a very important matter. Is it not desirable that Dr. Ambedkar who has put forward an amendment to article 289 should say something in support of his amendment. I think he would be proceeding on sound lines if he took the trouble of explaining to the House the reasons for asking it to replace the old article 289 by a new article. The matter is of the greatest importance and it is a great pity that Dr. Ambedkar has not considered it worth his while to make a few remarks on this proposition.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. President, Sir, I did not make any observation in support of the motion for two reasons. One reason was that if a debate took place on this article,—it is quite likely that a debate would undoubtedly take place—there would be certain points that will be raised in the debate, which it would be profitable for me to reply to at the close so as to avoid a duplication of any speech on my part. That is one reason.