Talk:Privy purse in India

India: Politics C‑class Low‑importance

	India portal This 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.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article was last assessed in March 2012.

Clean up required

The secion on "Abolition" is not neutral and uses very informal language like "losers", "so-called princes" etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.165.235 (talk) 01:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to go ahead and clean that section up. Might not be the best edit but I think it will do for the moment. Frayr (talk) 16:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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]

Recipients and amounts

I think conversion into USD based on current rate is wrong and paints a completely different picture. Readers will convert it to the present value of the dollar amount in 1947 compared to present value of the INR (Rupee) amount which is considerably higher. The exchange rate in 1947 was below Rupees 5 per USD. If any INR to USD conversion is made it must be at the historical rate rather then misguide the reader by using the current exchange rate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.249.96.2 (talk) 07:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]