PROCEEDINGS OF PARLIAMENT LEADING TO THE ABOLITION OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCILS IN THE STATES OF TAMIL NADU, ANDHRA PRADESH AND WEST BENGAL
The Committee also examined the proceedings of Parliament/Legislative Assemblies leading to the abolition of Legislative Councils of the states of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal. Proceedings leading to the abolition of Legislative Council in Punjab could not be made available. The summary of some of the relevant points raised in the Debates is given below:
Tamil Nadu (a) Law Minister said that Parliament is competent to abolish the Legislative Council of a State under Article 169 of the Constitution;
(b) Shri Balu, M. P. from Tamil Nadu opposed the Bill on the grounds that it is politically motivated and its main purpose is to reduce the popularity of Dr. K. Karunanidhi;
(c) Shri G. Swaminathan of Tamil Nadu stated that the Legislative Council had not served the purpose for which it has been set up and that other professions like doctors, engineers, etc., had not been represented in the Legislative Councils. He had further said that complete discretion was left to the Assembly whether to abolish the Legislative Council or not.
(d) Shri Shyam Lal Yadav said that the Legislative Council was a truncated House and hence there was no point in keeping them alive and that there should be a uniform system throughout the country.
West Bengal The Law Minister had said that under Article 169(1) of the Constitution, if the Legislative Council of a State passed a resolution providing for the abolition of Legislative Council of the State having such a Council or for the creation of such a Council in a State having no such Council and with the required majority, Parliament might. by law, provide for the abolition or the creation of a Council as the case may be. No such law shall be deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution.
2. Dr. S.K. Tipuria said that the Upper Houses have been brought to a position of mere ridicule by Governments by converting them into abodes of defeated politicians and rejected Ministers and suing the House as contraptions for bringing those men into Ministries who did not otherwise have the guts to face the electorate. He further said that as things stood these Upper House's had not served the purpose for which they were once intended.
Andhra Pradesh (a) It is mandatory for Parliament to ratify a Bill passed by the State Legislature;
(b) The Punjab Legislative Council (Abolition Bill) was passed on 25-7-63 and passed by Parliament in November the same year without any discussions;
(c) Dr. B.R. Ambedkar during the discussions of the of the Constituent assembly was not very enthusiastic about the Constitution of Legislative Councils. He had said that second Chamber in the States was being introduced purely as an experimental measure. He had further said that there would be sufficient provision for the amendment of the Constitution for getting rid of second Chamber. It was left to the people of the State to decide whether the second Chamber is necessary or not;
47
48
(d) Abolition Bill passed by Parliament on 14-5-1985.
Discussions in the Committee on Abolition of Councils
in States (i) The Legislative Councils are gradually being abolished in the States. As Legislative Council should have a minimum of 40 members, only States whose membership of the Assembly is more than 160 in number can have Legislative Councils. Consequently, even if the process of having Legislative Councils in States is revived, more than half of the States would not be eligible for having Legislative Councils and the anomaly in representation of teachers in the country will continue. In the Bihar Legislative Council, out of 62 members, nearly 20 are teachers, whereas there are only 8 seats from the teachers' constituency.
(ii) In Bihar, there are two and a half lakh teachers with 65,000 primary schools which have been taken over by the State Government and as such, almost all the primary school teachers in Bihar are Government servants and are, therefore, not eligible to contest elections. As such, from the teachers' community, only retired teachers or those who are retired voluntarily call seek election and become Members of the Council, Who are least concerned about improvement of academic performance of the teachers.
(iii) The Committee considered the view that if voting right is given to primary teachers, they would also be politicised. So long as Councils exist, status quo should be maintained. It was pointed out that at present teachers are also members of the local bodies. Municipal Corporation and the multiplicity about voting rights will continue. One may not favour abolishing the existing democratic system but suggest improvement of democratic system as Legislative Councils are a part of the democratic system.
(iv) Teachers' Representation in Legislative Councils at present is part of political approach and not on merit, as no outstanding teacher is straightaway elected to the Legislative Council.
(v) There is no reason why there should be any special representation to teachers in Teachers' Constituencies. The whole thing should be abolished oil practical ground.
(vi) It generally emerged that the teachers' representation in the Legislative Councils was given for a noble cause but it had not worked well. In practice, it his served the political purpose, rather than any academic purpose. The situation at present is entirely different. Any State Government can give representation to teachers in the Committees at various levels concerning educational matters and the primary schools teachers nowadays are mostly graduates.
(vii) There is no question of differentiating between primary or secondary grade teachers, There are various avenues for teachers to be heard and, as such, there is no reason why teachers should be given any special status. Moreover, the Councils have lost their relevance and, as such, there should not be any provision for teachers' representatives in the Councils and we should start with clean slate.
(viii) There should be no representation of teachers in Teachers' Constituencies as more than 80 % of the teachers (as per Appendix V) would not be eligible for election being Government school teachers. Only private school teachers will be eligible to send their representatives.
(ix) The Teachers' representation in the Legislative Councils has not been very satisfactory. If teachers are given any special privileges, these special privileges should also be given to freedom fighters, doctors and other professions. While due importance needs to be given to the democratic system, there should be no discrimination between one profession and the other.