Which one of the following formed the basic premise for developing the Indian Constitution ?

Correct — A, (a) The Government of India Act, 1935.

The stem asks for the BASIC PREMISE — the framework the Constitution was developed upon — and that is a different question from which constitution contributed which idea. On the framework, the answer is not in doubt: the Government of India Act, 1935 is the single largest source of the Constitution's structure and of its text.

What came across from it:

THE FEDERAL SCHEME. The 1935 Act divided legislative subjects into three lists — Federal, Provincial and Concurrent. The Constitution's Seventh Schedule is the same device with different names, and much of the machinery for resolving conflicts between the levels came with it. One change was deliberate: under the 1935 Act residuary power lay with the Governor-General, whereas Article 248 gives it to Parliament. THE OFFICE OF GOVERNOR and the relationship between the Governor and the provincial ministry. THE FEDERAL COURT, established under the Act in 1937, which is the direct institutional ancestor of the Supreme Court. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS at the federal and provincial levels. THE EMERGENCY PROVISIONS, and a great deal of administrative detail — the machinery of government provisions that make up the bulk of any constitution's length and none of its fame.

There is also a plain historical reason why the 1935 Act had to be the starting point. It was the law in force. After the Indian Independence Act, 1947, the Dominion of India continued to be governed under the Government of India Act, 1935 as adapted, and it remained the working constitution until 26 January 1950. The Constituent Assembly was therefore not drafting on a blank page; it was replacing a functioning statutory framework whose administrative provisions had been tested and whose officials, courts and legislatures were operating under it.

The other three options are not empty — two of them are genuine sources of particular FEATURES, and the question is testing whether the candidate can tell a source of features from the framework itself. 'U.S.' is printed with full stops and 'UN' without, as the booklet sets them.

Why the others are wrong

• (b)The U.S. Constitution — A real source, but of particular provisions rather than of the framework. From the United States came the Preamble's opening formula, the Fundamental Rights as a justiciable bill of rights, judicial review, the independence of the judiciary and the procedure for removing judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, the impeachment of the President, and the office of Vice-President as ex-officio presiding officer of the upper House. What did NOT come from it is decisive: India took a parliamentary executive rather than a presidential one, a strong Centre rather than residuary powers in the units, and a single integrated judiciary rather than the American dual system. A constitution that differs on the executive, the federal balance and the court structure is not the premise the Indian one was developed on.
• (c)The British Constitution — Also a real source of features, and the most pervasive one in daily practice — parliamentary government with a cabinet responsible to the legislature, the office of Prime Minister, the rule of law, the legislative procedure, single citizenship, bicameralism, parliamentary privileges and the prerogative writs. But the British constitution is unwritten and uncodified. It could not supply a drafting framework to a body whose task was to produce a single written document with enumerated powers and a schedule of subjects, and its central doctrine — the sovereignty of Parliament — is the very thing the Indian Constitution rejects in favour of constitutional supremacy. It gave India a system of government, not the premise of its Constitution.
• (d)The UN Charter — The odd one out, and not a source of the Constitution at all. The Charter of the United Nations, signed in 1945, is a treaty between states establishing an international organisation; it deals with the organs of the United Nations, the pacific settlement of disputes and collective security, and it binds member states in their international conduct rather than supplying them with domestic constitutional machinery. Its language on human rights, carried further by the Universal Declaration of 1948, belonged to the same post-war moment as the drafting of the Indian Constitution and shared its vocabulary, but sharing a vocabulary is not being a premise. The Preamble's justice, liberty, equality and fraternity trace to the French Revolution, not to the Charter.

The Constitution of India is a borrowing document, and questions about it come in two distinct shapes that must not be answered with the same information.

SHAPE ONE — 'WHICH SOURCE GAVE US THIS FEATURE ?' Here the standard attributions apply: Government of India Act, 1935 — federal scheme and the three lists, office of Governor, judiciary, Public Service Commissions, emergency provisions, administrative detail. United Kingdom — parliamentary government, rule of law, legislative procedure, single citizenship, cabinet system, writs, parliamentary privileges, bicameralism. United States — Fundamental Rights, judicial review, independence of the judiciary, impeachment of the President, removal of judges, office of Vice-President, preamble formula. Ireland — Directive Principles of State Policy, nomination of members to the Rajya Sabha, method of electing the President. Canada — a federation with a strong Centre, residuary powers with the Centre, appointment of Governors by the Centre, advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Australia — the Concurrent List, freedom of trade and commerce, joint sitting of the two Houses. Weimar Germany — suspension of Fundamental Rights during an emergency. Soviet Union — Fundamental Duties and the ideal of justice in the Preamble. France — liberty, equality and fraternity, and the republican ideal. South Africa — the amendment procedure and the election of Rajya Sabha members. Japan — the procedure established by law formulation.

SHAPE TWO — 'WHAT WAS THE BASIC PREMISE ?' Here the answer is the Government of India Act, 1935 alone, because the question is about the framework rather than about individual borrowings. The Act supplied the skeleton, the drafting vocabulary and a very large share of the actual provisions; the other sources supplied ideas that were fitted onto it.

Knowing which shape a question has is the whole skill. The words 'basic premise', 'framework', 'blueprint' and 'main source' point to the 1935 Act; 'borrowed from', 'inspired by' and 'derived from' point to the country list.

Key facts

• The Government of India Act, 1935 is the largest single source of the Indian Constitution's structure and text, supplying the federal scheme, the office of Governor, the judiciary, the Public Service Commissions, the emergency provisions and much administrative detail.
• The 1935 Act divided subjects into Federal, Provincial and Concurrent Lists; the Constitution's Seventh Schedule follows the same device, but moves residuary power from the Governor-General to Parliament under Article 248.
• The Federal Court established under the 1935 Act in 1937 is the institutional ancestor of the Supreme Court of India.
• After the Indian Independence Act, 1947 the Dominion of India continued to be governed under the Government of India Act, 1935 as adapted, until 26 January 1950.
• From the United States came the Fundamental Rights, judicial review, judicial independence and the removal procedure for judges, impeachment of the President and the office of Vice-President.
• From the United Kingdom came parliamentary government, the cabinet system, the rule of law, single citizenship, the writs and parliamentary privileges.
• The UN Charter, signed in 1945, is a treaty establishing an international organisation and is not a source of the Indian Constitution.

Common traps

• Choosing the British constitution because India follows the Westminster system. It supplied the form of government, not a written framework, and India rejected its central doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty.
• Choosing the U.S. Constitution because of the Fundamental Rights and judicial review. Those are borrowed features; the executive, the federal balance and the court structure all differ.
• Reading past the qualifier 'basic premise'. Several options are defensible as influences, and the qualifier is what narrows the question to the framework.
• Treating the UN Charter as a constitutional source because it belongs to the same period and uses similar language about rights. It is a treaty among states, not a domestic constitutional model.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Under the Government of India Act, 1935, residuary powers of legislation were vested in

  • (a)the Federal Legislature
  • (b)the Provincial Legislatures
  • (c)the Governor-General
  • (d)the Federal Court

  Answer(c) the Governor-General — the 1935 Act divided subjects into Federal, Provincial and Concurrent Lists and left the residue to the discretion of the Governor-General. The Constitution changed this, giving residuary power to Parliament under Article 248, which is one of the clearest departures the framers made from the Act they otherwise drew on so heavily.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  The Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution of India were borrowed from the constitution of

  • (a)the United States of America
  • (b)Ireland
  • (c)Canada
  • (d)Australia

  Answer(b) Ireland — the Directive Principles, the nomination of members to the Rajya Sabha and the method of electing the President all come from the Irish constitution. Canada supplied the strong-Centre federation and the appointment of Governors; Australia supplied the Concurrent List, freedom of trade and commerce, and the joint sitting of the two Houses.