 METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES

The Committee to examine the question about teachers' representation in Legislative Councils was formed on 10-2-1992 as per Government Order No. F. 3-11/91-PN.I with Shri Veerappa Moiley, Education Minister, Karnataka, as Chairman and nine other members (A copy of the Order constituting the Committee is at Annexure). The terms of reference are :

(a) to examine--whether representation of the present provision regarding separate Teachers' Constituencies in Legislative Council elections is at all desirable;

(b) If so, whether the status quo should continue or whether the Constitution should be amended so as to include elementary teachers in Teachers' Constituencies.

The Government Order envisaged that the Committee will lay down its own procedures and methodology of work.

2. The Committee in its first meeting held in New Delhi on 13-3-1992, discussed the procedure and methodology to be followed by it in completing the task assigned to it. It was agreed upon that although a vast amount of material is already available, a systematic study of various factors necessary for taking a decision in the matter is called for. Further, an in-depth study of the materials available should be made and the legal and constitutional aspects should also be examined by the Committee. The Committee decided to go into the rationale of creation of Legislative Councils as well as factors leading to creation of a separate Constituency for the teachers. This would include a critical study of the proceedings of the Constituent Assembly as well as other relevant material for this purpose. It was noted that although four States, where Legislative Councils with Teachers' Constituencies are still in operation, have sent their comments, they should again be requested to send their comments so that if there had been any rethinking on the matter, the Committee could take the same into account. This was felt particularly to be necessary because the States had been sending different recommendations at different points of time.

3. The opinion of other States where Legislative Councils were not in existence, should also be obtained because not only was the issue of great public importance but also because some of the States had Legislative Councils in the past and have now abolished the same. The discussions in the various Assemblies as well as in the Parliament about the abolition of Legislative Councils could also be a valuable source of material for studying the subject before the Committee. These were to be obtained and placed before the Committee. The Committee also thought that it could benefit from the views and opinions expressed by the Election Commission, the Ministry of Law and the Human Resource Development Ministry at different points of time since this matter has been under the consideration of the Central Government on several occasions.

4. Jammu and Kashmir is one State having Legislative Council which does not have a separate Teachers' Constituency. The Committee desired to study the reasons for such provision not being incorporated in Jammu and Kashmir and for this purpose, proceedings of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, if available, could be helpful. The Committee noted in this meeting that since almost 90% of the teachers are Government employees and hence not entitled to seek election from this Constituency, the actual beneficiaries of this Provision are generally those who are not working teachers. A suggestion was made that the Committee could study the profile of the

representatives in the Councils from this Constituency, may be for a period of about 20 Years.

5. It was also brought out before the Committee that since the petition before the Petition's Committee of the Rajya Sabha was given by Tamil Nadu Teachers' Association where the Legislative Council no longer existed, the Committee should examine whether the petitioners were making this demand on behalf of teachers of the entire country or only for the teachers of Tamil Nadu.

It was, therefore, decided :

(a) to write to all the State Governments, whether they are having Legislative Councils or not, to communicate their present viewpoint on the matter as the issue involves wider implications;

(b) that a copy each of the (a) 90th Report of the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions; (b) relevant proceedings made under Article 171 (3)(c) of the Consti- tution about voting rights to teachers; and (c) a copy of the views expressed by the State Governments from time to time in a tabular form may be circulated to the Members of the Committee;

(c) that where Legislative Councils have been abolished, proceedings of the Legislative Assemblies/Parliament leading to the abolition of Legislative Councils in States be also made available to the Members of the Committee;

(d) that copies of the relevant proceedings of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir wherein it has been decided that no separate representation be given to teachers in Legislative Council may also be made available to the participants of the Committee;

(e) to obtain the complete profile of teachers' representation in Legislative Councils during the last 20 years;

(f) that the original petition of Tamil Nadu Teachers' Federation may also be gone through to see whether they represented teachers of Tamil Nadu only or teachers all over the country.

6. The Committee was conscious of the fact that it was to submit its report within two months of its first meeting. It was, therefore, decided that a, specific time limit should be given to various States/agencies for sending their views and if the same are not available in time, then the Committee could proceed further on the basis of materials and views available before it.

7. The matter was taken up with all the State Governments, seeking their fresh views within three weeks, whether :

(i) retention of present provision regarding separate teachers' constituencies in Legislative Councils is at all desirable;

(ii) the status quo should be maintained or the Constitution should be amended to include elementary teachers in the Teachers' Constituencies.

8. Replies from nine State Governments have been received upto the time of writing the Report. Replies received from various State Governments are given below:

HARYANA :

The State Government has stated that there is no need to retain the present provision for separate Teachers' Constituencies in the Legislative Councils for the following reasons :

(i) The provision regarding separate Teachers' Constituencies in the Legislative Councils may have been made in the Constitution with the aim to induct intellectuals in the Legislative Council as they might be shy of contesting the

elections. These provisions at that stage could be of some value but over a period of 40 years, the situation in the country and the education system has considerably changed;

(ii) retaining separate teachers' constituencies and involving teachers even below the higher secondary level will result in expanding the scope of involvement of teachers in politics and spoiling the atmosphere of educational institutions right upto the primary level. There is a tendency among the teachers to involve themselves in the politics at college/university level and the time has come to consider as to whether such a tendency among the teaching class should further be allowed to develop or be curbed and their role will be limited to teaching. To keep the teachers away from the politics, it is desirable that the teachers' Constituencies in Legislative Councils be abolished forthwith;

(iii) due to expansion of education, other categories of intellectuals, such as doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc. who also constitute a sizeable number of intellectual population in the country, may demand separate constituencies as well ;

(iv) in fact, the provisions contained in Article 171 (b) providing separate Constituencies for graduates in the Legislative Councils covers all categories of' intellectuals, including the teachers and, as such, there is no need to retain separate teachers' Constituencies in the Legislative Councils.

HIMACHAL PRADESH

Status quo may be maintained under Article 171 (3)(c) of the Constitution and there is no logic in extending the voting rights to primary school teachers.

ARUNACHAL PRADESH:

The Arunachal Pradesh Government have stated that (a) the retention of the present provision regarding separate Teachers' Constituencies in Legislative Councils is desirable; (b) the status quo should be maintained without any discrimination of teachers of all levels for their representation in the Teachers' Constituencies.

ORISSA :

Since the State does not have a Legislative Council, it has no comments to offer.

TRIPURA:

Since the State does not have a Legislative Council, the State Government has no comments to offer.

BIHAR :

State Government is of the opinion that voting rights in Teachers' Constituencies in Legislative Council may be extended to primary school teachers also.

MAHARASHTRA

The State Government still holds the views communicated by them earlier. However, they have further stated as under :

"However, since a Committee has been set up and would like to look into the issue in depth, we would add the following further comments for Your consideration. Upper Houses are in existence only in Five States. Therefore, whether a Constitutional amendment should be initiated to remove the discrimination between school teachers working at various levels is a matter to be considered by the Government of India, taking into account the position whether these States are inclined to continue with the Upper Houses. However, there is no doubt that the existing provisions make discrimination between the teachers who are qualified, some of whom teaching at the primary levels in secondary schools, with the

others teaching at primary level in schools which are themselves only primary schools. The level of voter qualifications would normally be the same in both these cases and, therefore, it is true that there is some discrimination. Educational institutions not lower in standard than that of secondary schools, which are referred to in Article 171(3)(c) of the Constitution of India are specified by the Election Commission, so far as this State is concerned, under Section 27(3)(b) of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1950, and since the system of recognition of all primary schools in the State of Maharashtra irrespective of whether the schools are private or run by public agency is also well laid down under the definition of "approved Schools" vide Section 2(2) of the Bombay Primary Education Act, 1947 read with Section 39 of that Act, there will be no difficulty, in this State in expanding the scope of enrolment in the teachers' Constituencies to include teachers in such Primary educational institutions also. It may be noted, however, that Montessori teaching and teaching below the level of 1st standard are not covered under the Bombay Primary Education Act, 1947 and teachers in such institutions will not be eligible for inclusion in the electoral rolls even if the constitutional amendment is made to cover "primary" or "elementary" schools. Needless to add, in case the constitutional amendments are made, corresponding amendments thereafter in Section 27(3)(b) of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1950, will also be necessary."

RAJASTHAN :

The State Government has recommended amendment in the constitution to include elementary school teachers in Legislative Councils.

SIKKIM :

Since the State Government has no Legislative Council, it has no views in the matter.

Thus, out of 9 State Governments, from whom replies have been received so far, 3 States (namely Bihar, Haryana and Maharashtra) are in favour of amendment of the Constitution to include voting rights to elementary school teachers in Legislative Councils, 2 States (namely Himachal Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh) have recommended status quo while 3 States (namely Orissa, Sikkim and Tripura) have offered no comments and Haryana Government have stated that there is no need to retain the present provision.

8. The matter was taken up with the Parliament Library, requesting them to furnish relevant extracts of the proceedings of Parliament/Constituent Assembly in regard to provisions made under Article 171 of the Constitution and the same was obtained from there.

9. The Parliament Library was also requested to furnish copies of the following documents for consideration by the Committee:

(i) proceedings of the Parliament/State Assemblies leading to the abolition of Legislative Councils in the States of Punjab, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu;

(ii) since Jammu and Kashmir has a separate Constitution, the proceedings of the Constituent Assembly of the State as to why teachers were not given any voting rights.

10. Proceedings of Parliament relating to the abolition of Legislative Councils in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal were also Procured and placed before the Committee. Proceedings regarding abolition of Legislative Councils as also the proceedings of J&K Constituent Assembly could not be made available.

11. The Ministry of Law was requested to make available a copy each of the above documents. The Law Ministry informed that all the records relating to debates ill Parliament were not available with that Ministry. However, proceedings of Parliament leading to abolition of Legislative Councils in the States of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu could be obtained from the Central Secretariat Library. Accordingly, these were obtained from the Central Secretariat Library and circulated to the Members of the Committee.

12. The matter was also taken up with the Election Commission of India requesting them to furnish the following information :

(i) an analysis of educational profile of those elected to Legislative Councils during the last 20 years under Article 171 (3)(c) of the Constitution ;

(ii) professional status of those elected under Article 171(3)(c) of the Constitution during the last 20 years. This would give the number of secondary school teachers, elementary school teachers, university teachers, etc. ;

(iii) whether there have been some changes over a period of time in the profile of those elected tinder Article 171(3)(c) with regard to their professional status ;

(iv) any other relevant information relating thereto.

The Election Commission have stated that they do not maintain the profile of elected Members of Legislatures, Union or States and, as such, the information cannot be supplied. They have also advised us to contact the State Governments in the matter.

13. The Secretaries of Legislative Councils of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra and Karnataka were requested to provide the requisite information. This has been received from Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra Governments only.

14. The Governments of West Bengal, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu were requested to provide copies of the proceedings of State Assemblies leading to the abolition of Legislative Councils. Proceedings of Legislative Assemblies relating to the abolition of Legislative Council in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal have been received.

15. In response to our letter to Jammu and Kashmir Government seeking the above information, the Govt. of Jammu and Kashmir have informed that they have nothing to add to what they have stated earlier and the corresponding provision, i.e., Section 50 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir does not provide for giving representation to any category of teachers in the Legislative Councils.