382827

I am glad, Sir, that Dr. Ambedkar has agreed to leave out the word “provisional” before the word “President”, because I cannot see how you can have a provisional President. The House, duly constituted, will elect the President. He may be the first President, but you cannot call him “provisional”. The word “provisional” will mean that somebody has nominated him. I do not want any aspersion cast on our first President and I therefore thought that the word “first” will be more appropriate. Under the Government of India Act of 1935 when Orissa was separated from Bihar and N. W. F. Province was created into a separate province, and when Sind was separated from Bombay and constituted as a separate province, during the transitory period, the Governors of these provinces were called the first Governors although they were nominated. I think that the word “provisional” will be unjustified and unfair to use in connection with our first President whom we shall be electing under the provisions, of this Constitution. I am therefore glad that the Drafting Committee has omitted the word “provisional”. I would prefer the word “first” but the omission of the word “provisional” serves my purpose, and I have no objection to it. With these words, I commend the amendment for the acceptance of the House.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *