Skip to content
Indian Liberals
Filter:

Tip: search runs across all languages; results are tokenised per-page using the document's lang attribute. Search inside the documents →

essay

THE CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1967.

New Delhi · 1967

2 pages

Summary

This two-page 1967 proposed Lok Sabha bill, introduced by P.K. Deo, M.P., seeks to amend Article 164 of the Constitution of India. It would establish a specific procedure for appointing a State’s Chief Minister: within a week of election results or a vacancy, the Governor would summon the Legislative Assembly to elect the Leader of the House, who would then be appointed Chief Minister. Other Ministers would be appointed by the Governor on the Chief Minister’s advice and would hold office during the Governor’s pleasure.

The bill also retains a special provision for Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Orissa requiring a Minister in charge of tribal welfare, with possible responsibility for the welfare of Scheduled Castes, backward classes, or other work. Its Statement of Objects and Reasons argues that the Constitution provides no set procedure for appointing State Chief Ministers and that gubernatorial discretion has sometimes permitted appointments without regard to the electorate’s verdict. The bill is therefore presented as a governance reform intended to align ministerial appointments more closely with legislative and electoral outcomes.

Key points

  • The document is a proposed Constitution (Amendment) Bill introduced in the Lok Sabha in 1967 by P.K. Deo, M.P.
  • It proposes to amend Article 164 concerning the appointment and functioning of State Ministers.
  • The Governor would summon the State Legislative Assembly to elect the Leader of the House after an election or a Chief Ministerial vacancy.
  • The elected Leader of the House would be appointed Chief Minister by the Governor.
  • Other Ministers would be appointed on the advice of the Chief Minister.
  • The bill preserves a tribal-welfare minister provision for Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Orissa.
  • The Statement of Objects and Reasons criticizes the absence of a constitutionally specified appointment procedure and the potential disregard of the electorate’s verdict.

Metadata and summary are AI-extracted from the source PDF and reviewed for editorial accuracy. The original work is available via the Read PDF tab above (where present); paragraph-level citation inside the PDF is deferred to a future engagement.

Related across the archive