Indira Gandhi wanted to remove the provision of the Privy Purse. She had some reasons against this provision. Following are the options, find out which was not the reason for abolishing Privy Purse.
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 4
The correct answer is Option (4) → It was not consonant with the concept of sovereignty
The privy purse was a grant given in heredity to the families of the former rulers of the princely states. Such hereditary privileges were not consonant with the principles of equality and social and economic justice laid down in the Constitution.
Option (1) It was not consonant with the principles of equality — A reason given (Incorrect). A privilege enjoyed only because of birth in a ruling family goes against equality.
Option (2) It was not consonant with the concept of social justice — A reason given (Incorrect). Social justice, laid down in the Constitution, does not allow special treatment of a few families by birth.
Option (3) It was not consonant with the concept of economic justice — A reason given (Incorrect). A grant from public money to a few already rich families went against economic justice.
Option (4) It was not consonant with the concept of sovereignty — Not a reason given (Correct). Sovereignty means the supreme authority of the state over its territory. The princely states had already merged with India, so the privy purse did not take away any of India’s sovereignty; it was a question of privilege, not of sovereignty.
NCERT (2026-27): “Abolition of Privy Purse … This grant was called the privy purse. At the time of accession, there was little criticism of these privileges since integration and consolidation was the primary aim. Yet, hereditary privileges were not consonant with the principles of equality and social and economic justice laid down in the Constitution of India.…” |