Page 178 - DHIS204_DHIS205_INDIAN_FREEDOM_STRUGGLE_HINDI

Unit 11: India Independent to 1964

In recent years, pressure has built up for reservation of one-third of constituencies for women and Notes
a bill on those lines was also introduced in parliament in 1998, but it remains caught up in the web
of claims and counter-claims of caste and religious groups who are demanding reservation within
reservation, on the ground that else only upper-caste, elite, Hindu women will corner the seats
reserved for women. Whatever the final outcome, the controversy has demonstrated clearly the
self-propelling dynamic of the principle of reservation.
However desirable the objective, once the principle is accepted, it is virtually impossible to prevent
further claims to the same benefits by other groups. The practice of reservation has also shown
that it is almost impossible to reverse. The constitution had envisaged reservations as a short-term
measure lasting ten years; no government has ever seriously considered not extending them every
ten years, and it is now nearly fifty years! On the contrary, demands for and acceptance of
reservation have only increased. Even the question— whether reservation, which per se perpetuates
certain group identities, can become a barrier to the concept of citizenship as embodied in the
constitution—is difficult to ask in the prevailing political climate. Disadvantaged groups, and
certainly their leaders, are easily convinced that reservation is the panacea for all ills, perhaps
because it enables rapid upward mobility for some visible and vocal sections of the groups or
because a bird in hand is considered to be better than the invisible one in the bush of the future.
The maximum number of seats in the Lok Sabha is 552. Of these, 550 represent territorial
constituencies, and two go to nominated members from the Anglo-Indian community. Members
must be at least twenty-five years of age. The Lok Sabha is chaired by the speaker, and in his
absence by the deputy speaker, both of whom are elected by members from amongst themselves.
By convention, the speaker’s post goes to the majority party and the deputy speaker’s to the
Opposition. But again, in recent years, fractured verdicts, unstable coalitions, claims of rival groups
within and outside the government, have upset established conventions. There were fairly well-
established conventions that the election of the speaker and deputy speaker would be kept free of
contest to assure their non-partisan image and the speaker should be a person of considerable
ability and influence capable of asserting his authority in the house. But in 1998, the BJP-led
government first backed out of a promise to support a Congress nominee, P.A. Sangma, as a
consensus candidate and then had elected an unknown face, Balayogi, to please its alliance partner,
the Telugu Desam party. This was unfortunate, for the constitution entrusts great responsibility to
the speaker: within and in all matters relating to the Lok Sabha, the speaker’s word is final.
The parliament has extensive legislative powers and bills may be introduced in any house. To
become law, bills must be passed by both houses, and then receive presidential assent. The President
may, however, send the bills back to parliament or the government for reconsideration. If they are
passed again, the President cannot withhold assent. Money-bills, however, must be introduced
first in the Lok Sabha, and on the President’s recommendation. They go to the Rajya Sabha, and if
not returned with suggestions in fourteen days, are taken as passed. Recommendations of the
Rajya Sabha may or may not be accepted by the Lok Sabha in the case of money-bills.
The constitution thus clearly envisaged parliament as an institution with great dignity and accorded
privileges to its members commensurate with that position. Unfortunately, in recent years, the
conduct of some members and parties who have disturbed even the President’s address, indulged
in unnecessary walkouts, shouting, even physical scuffles, has lowered the dignity of the parliament
and delayed necessary legislative business. This has led to a popular disgust with members of
parliament and a common feeling that parliament is just a big waste of taxpayers’ money.
A Secular State
The constitution declares India to be a sovereign, socialist, secular and democratic republic. Even
though the terms secular (and socialist) were added only by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, the
spirit embodying the constitution was secular. In 1973 the Supreme Court held the secular character
of the constitution to be one of the basic features of the constitution. Further, the Fundamental
Rights include prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion and right to freedom of religion
including freedom of conscience and free profession, practise and propagation of religion, freedom
to manage religious affairs, freedom to pay taxes for promotion of any particular religion and

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 173