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. |
It was not consonant with the principles of equality It was not consonant with the concept of social justice It was not consonant with the concept of economic justice It was not consonant with the concept of sovereignty |
It was not consonant with the concept of sovereignty |
The correct answer is Option 4 - It was not consonant with the concept of sovereignty The integration of the princely states in India was preceded by an assurance that after the dissolution of princely rule, the then rulers’ families would be allowed to retain certain private property, and given a grant in heredity or government allowance, measured on the basis of the extent, revenue and potential of the merging state. This grant was called the privy purse. At the time of accession, there was little criticism of these privileges since integration and consolidation were 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. Nehru had expressed his dissatisfaction over the matter time and again. Following the 1967 elections, Indira Gandhi supported the demand that the government should abolish privy purses. Morarji Desai, however, called the move morally wrong and amounting to a ‘breach of faith with the princes’. The government tried to bring a Constitutional amendment in 1970, but it was not passed in Rajya Sabha. It then issued an ordinance which was struck down by the Supreme Court. Indira Gandhi made this into a major election issue in 1971 and got a lot of public support. Following its massive victory in the 1971 election, the Constitution was amended to remove legal obstacles for abolition of ‘privy purse’. |