THE MEANING . . . . . . . . . ‘RECEIPT’ 95
they cannot have it both ways. To permit them the discretion to call or not to call the session of the Council and at the same time to allow them to take the benefit of clause (5) is not only to give them the freedom to cheat one House of the Legislature but to play a fraud upon the Constitution. This is exactly what the Bihar Government has done. When a money Bill is transmitted to the Upper Chamber it is the duty of the Government to call a Session of the Council and it is a matter which is entirely and exclusively with its power. If it does not do so it cannot take advantage of clause (5) of Article 198.
For these reasons I agree with the view taken by the learned Advocate General of Bihar and reject the view of the learned R.L.A.
I have dwealt with the arguments of the R.L.A. at such a considerable length only out of respect for him. Otherwise I would have summarily rejected it. The point to my mind is not at all abstruse. It is so plain that a man having nothing more than common-sense could have understood that the intention of the framers of the Constitution was. What the Government of Bihar has done is a deliberate and calculated act of fraud. I refuse to believe that what it has done is done out of want of understanding. I cannot help saying that the Government of Bihar has descended to the low level of a common cheat. I feel so strongly about it that I do not mind my sentiments in this respect being conveyed to the Bihar Government.
Before I conclude I would like to raise a question which is solely for the consideration of the Law Department. We are getting a large number of references from State Government for advice on disputed points arising out of the Constitution. We entertain these references and give our advice. That advice is followed and becomes part of the Constitutional usage. I wonder if we are acting wisely in doing this. Would it not be better to leave the parties to act as they think and take their chance in Court ? For as pointed out by Craie’s (Statute Law, p. 140) usage becomes an important element in the interpretation of a Statute. By our advice we set up a usage and thereby support a particular interpretation which in the absence of it may not be supportable and if our advice is wrong we become