Assembly, that Hindi was given the place in the
Constitution of India, as the official language of
the Indian Union.”
The Puzzle of One Vote Majority
The procedure followed inside and outside the
Constituent Assembly for the resolution of the
official language issue was confusing. It is often
pointed out that the issue was resolved by the
majority of one vote. But there are also scholars
who do not accept this view. Further there are
differences of opinions on the place of voting
and the subjects of voting. The scholars and
even the members of Constituent Assembly
offer different versions of the events leading to
the resolution of the official language issue.
Dr. B. Ambedkar, the Chairman of the Drafting
Committee, writes, “After a prolonged
discussion, when the question was put, the
vote was 78 against 78. The tie could not be
resolved. After a long time, when the question
was put to the meeting once more, the result
was 77 against 78 for Hindi. Hindi won its place
as the national language by one vote.”
Seth Govind Das, one of the prominent leaders
of the Hindi extremists in the Constituent
Assembly, has made a reference to this in his
autobiography: “When the votes were taken,
78 were in favour of Hindi and 77 in favour
of Hinudstani... This was not liked by the
supporters of Hindustani and they descended
to rowdyism... Kaka Bhagwant Rai of Patiala,
having cast his vote in favour of Hindi and
knowing the result to have been in favour of
Hindi left the Assembly due to some urgent
work. When votes were again taken, on the
matter being pressed by the supporters of
Hindustani, the Hindi side had one less vote and
therefore both sides were equal at 77.”
C. Subramaniam, a member of the Assembly
from Madras, says: “At one stage a resolution
was passed by the Congress Party accepting
Hindi as the national language with Devanagari
script. We from the South and members
from West Bengal strongly protested against
the adoption of this resolution and it looked
as if there would be a sharp division in the
party. Pandit Nehru was very sensitive to the
feelings of the non-Hindi people. Therefore
the question of language was postponed” In his
another book in Tamil, “Tamizhal Mudiyum” (It
is Possible in Tamil), he has written that voting
took place on the question of whether to accept
Hindi immediately or after 15 years and it was
decided by one vote majority.
Selig S. Harrison accepts the view that Hindi
was accepted by one vote majority, based on
an article published in The Hindu on 27 January
1958.
Michael Brecher writes: “When the Official
Language clause had been put to a vote on the
floor of the Assembly, on 14 September, 1949,
it had reportedly been approved by one vote-78
to 77.
B.D. Khobaragade, made an observation in
this regard in the Rajya Sabha on 4 May 1963:
“I am not divulging any secret when I say that
in the Congress Parliamentary Party, Hindi was
adopted by a majority of one vote. At first,
there was equal voting, same number of votes
for Hindi and same number against Hindi, and
when there was second count, I am given to
understand, that the President had to use his
casting vote and therefore Hindi was adopted”
B.V.R. Rao informs “It is believed that out of
75 members of the Constituent Assembly, 37
members cast their vote for Hindi becoming the
sole official language of the Union Government
and 37 members voted for English to continue
as an official language. Then the casting vote of
Dr. Rajendra Prasad in favour of Hindi clinched
the issue and Hindi in Devanagari script
became the sole official language of the Union
Government.”
Bipan Chandra points out that “the Congress
Legislative Party decided for Hindi against
Hindustani by 78 to 77 votes, even though
Nehru and Azad fought for Hindustani.”
On a careful scrutiny of records and information
given by scholars and others the following
points clearly emerge:
- As per the records, the language provisions
were passed unanimously in the Constituent
Assembly. So the question of tie-voting
and President Rajendra Prasad exercising
his casting vote does not arise. Then the
voting might have taken place in some other
The Modern RationalistJuly 2019
