Table of Contents
- Most Congressmen were opposed to payment of privy purses, as most were seen as lackeys of the British.
- But Sardar Patel made a stirring speech in the Constituent Assembly on October 12, 1949.
- He asked members to realise that this was a small price to pay for the integration of India.
- He told them that the cash assets given by the rulers of Madhya Bharat were alone sufficient to cover the payment of privy purses to all princes.
- Therefore, to deny them their due would be a breach of faith.
What is Privy Purse
- In return for surrendering their powers, Articles 291 and 362 guaranteed them a tax-free privy purse which was approximately one-fourth of what they had earlier earned.
In Maharaja: The Lives, Loves, and Intrigues of the Maharajas of India, Jarmani Dass writes.
“Minor feudatories of the erstwhile princely states received whatever little allowances the princely governments had been providing them. For the 565 princely states, Privy Purses ranged from 5000 Rupees per annum to amounts in millions. 102 Privy Purses were of more than a lakh rupees with an upper ceiling of 2 lakh rupees for all except 11 states. Only six of the most important Princely states in India were provided with Privy Purses above 1,000,000 Rupees: Hyderabad, Mysore, Travancore, Baroda, Jaipur, and Patiala. For certain other states, while certain amounts were guaranteed for the time being, it was liable to be reduced soon after. Thus Hyderabad which received initially a Privy Purse of Rs. 4,285,714 was a few years later guaranteed a Rs. 2,000,000 purse.”
September 5, 1970
- A bill to amend the Constitution and abolish privy purses was passed in the Lok Sabha but defeated in the Rajya Sabha
- President V.V. Giri withdrew recognition of all rulers under Article 366 (22), thus reneging on the constitutional promise that honoured the commitment made by Sardar Patel to the princes.
H. Maharajadhiraja Madhav Rao … vs Union Of India on 15 December, 1970
- The Supreme Court held that the derecognition was unconstitutional.
- Just nine days after this humiliating verdict, Indira Gandhi called upon the president to call for fresh elections.
- Riding on the “Garibi Hatao” slogan and a socialist agenda, she came back to power with a stunning victory and 350 seats in the Lok Sabha.
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS
- The concept of rulership, with privy purses and special privileges unrelated to any current functions and social purposes, is incompatible with an egalitarian social order.
- Government have, therefore, decided to terminate the privy purses and privileges of the Rulers of former Indian States.
- It is necessary for this purpose, apart from amending the relevant provisions of the Constitution, to insert a new article therein so as to terminate expressly the recognition already granted to such Rulers and to abolish privy purses and extinguish all rights, liabilities and obligations in respect of privy purses. Hence this Bill.
- The 26th Amendment to the Constitution formally and finally abolished the privy purses.
- The shocking justification given to abolish the privy purses was that it was incompatible with an egaliatarian social order.
- There was not a single mention of the enormous efforts required to persuade the princes to be part of integrated India.
Constitutional Amendment Series Download Free PDF
WhatsApp