Merits of the Act of 1935

Merits of the Act of 1935

1.         The Act of 1935 extended franchises to more people to enable them to show more interests in national affairs.

2.         The Act provided considerable autonomy to the provinces.

3.         The political parties were provided an opportunity to known their strength and many   leaders got experience in administering the government.

4.         Principle of Parliamentary from of Government was accepted.

5.         The Indians were provided an opportunity to do some conservative work.

6.         Federal Court at national level was established.

7.         The Indian Constitution was designed more or less on the pattern introduced by the  Government of India Act, 1935.

            Demerits (Criticism)

1.         The Governor-General and Governors were given extraordinary powers.

2.         There was dyarchy at the federal administration thought it was abolished in provinces.

3.         Communalism influenced the Constitution of India and Government which could not  satisfy the either Muslims or Hindus.

4.         Indians were not given full power and not allowed to administer the Government of India. The Indians were not satisfied with this piecemeal system.

5.         The native states were given option either to join or not to join the federation and this led for the failure of federal system in India.

            Pandit Nehru called the Act of 1935 "a machine with strong brakes and no engine".  Jinnah called it as "thoroughly rotten, fundamentally bad, and totally unacceptable". Malaviya said, "The new Act has been Trust upon us. It has somewhat democratic appearance outwardly, but it is absolutely hollow from inside".

            G.Y. Chintamani was of the opinion, "we are given a limp federation full undesirable

features, ill-balanced as between the Stats and the provinces and denied powers which are vital to the every government worthy of the name".

The Indian National Congress was of the opinion that the Act of 1935 "is a prodigy of imperialist statesmanship. It is an elaborate and ingenious device to frustrate the emergence of free India".

Comparison between the Constitution of India, 1950 and the Government of India Act, 1935

            Through the Constitution of India, 1950 resembles to certain provision made in the Government of India Act, 1935. It is not correct that the Constitution of India, 1950 is wholly based on the Act of 1935 and it is also not correct to suggest that the scheme of Federation under the Constitution is fundamentally the same as under the Government of India Act, 1935. The Constitution of India differs from the Governments of India Act, 1935, in essential particulars.

            The main points of resemblance and difference between the provisions of the Constitution of India and the matters detailed in Government of India Act, 1935 are presented in short as under:

1.         Origin: The two documents differ form each other in respect between the their authority as one was made by the Parliament of England while the other is the expression of   supreme will of the people of India who are the source of all power and authority.

2.         Democratic Principles: The presented Constitution makes a wider application of  Democratic principles than the Governments of India Act 1935. Which was determined      and dominated by Imperial will and not by National Considerations.

3.         Fundamentals Rights and Duties: The provision of fundamental rights and duties have been made in the present Constitution, but the Government of India Act, 1935 did not    contain any such thing.

4.         Liquidation of Princes: The present Constitution liquidates all the princes divesting them of their ruling powers. The Government of India Act, 1935 allowed the ruling princes to send their nominees to the Federal Legislature and now there is nothing of that sort.

5.         Abolition of jurisdiction of Privy Council: With the assumption of full sovereignty and  independence, the Jurisdiction of Privy Council is abolished.

6.         Federal Structure: The present Constitution does not, however completely do away with the past. It borrowed its Federal from the Government of India Act, 1935. The present       Constitution is less rigid and more democratic.

7.         More autonomy of States: The presented Constitution grants more autonomy to the  component units of the Union of Indian than that enjoyed by the provinces under the       Government of India Act, 1935.

8.         Powers: The Federal Government as contemplated by the Government of India Act, 1935 was dyarchical from of governments; it was Government with responsibility but without       power which was retained by the British Government. We have, in our Constitution,neither 'reserved subjects' nor' discretionary powers'. Under which the President acts          only as a Constitutional head on aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.   

9.         Executive Heads: Under the Act of 1935, the Governor-General was vested with very     wide powers. He was to select ministers and to dismiss them according to his own     discretion. Now, there is no such discretion with any authority in the presented             Constitution. The executive Heads, viz., the President and the Governors have to act on the aid advice of the Council of ministers.

10.       Social and Secular State; As per Government of India Act, 1935. India is under the rule            of monarchy i.e., Crown of Britain while Constitution of India, 1950 envisases a socialist,   secular, democratic Republic.