Jump to content

Talk:Privy purse in India

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 61.68.165.235 (talk) at 01:41, 27 April 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconIndia: Politics Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup.

Clean up required

The secion on "Abolition" is not neutral and uses very informal language like "losers", "so-called princes" etc.

New Page - RfC

Just started the page, off-the-cuff. So the page needs contributions and comments. My aim is to deal with process leading to the abolition. Esp. some precedents in Constitutional Law in India. But the background and the details would be necessary to present a complete picture. Regards all. VivekM 13:46, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Abolition

The Privy Purses, and the official recognition of the titles, were abolished by the government of India c. 1969. This was done by then Prime Minister of India Mrs Indira Gandhi to reduce the growing revenue deficit. However, the motion was originally defeated by one vote in the Parliament of India. Later, Indira Gandhi amended the constitution to abolish the practise. This led to the split of the Indian National Congress into a Pro-Indira Congress (R) and an anti-Indira Congress (O). [1]

It's not particularly clear on how it was abolished. The first motion was defeated. Then she amended the consitution which I would assume require another motion/vote and I would assume must have passed. But it also led to the split of her party. How many percent support was required for each motion. I would assume amending the constituion would have required at least 2/3 majority but I don't know much about the Indian system of government... Nil Einne 01:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]