Government of India Act, 1935:1

After the conclusion of the Third Round Table Conference in London, a white paper was issued in March 1933
giving details of the basis of the working of the new Constitution of India. Among the principal sources, from
which the Act drew its materials, were the Simon Commission Report, the report of the All-Parties Conference
(the Nehru Report), the theme of the discussions of three Round Table Conferences, the White Papers, the Joint
Select Committee Report and the Lothian Report. This lengthy Act of India was piloted in the House of
Commons by the Secretary of State for India, Sir Samuel Hoare in February 1935. It became the Government of
India Act on 2nd August, 1935.

This Act established a “Federation of India” made up of British Indian Provinces (Governor’s Province and
Commissioner’s Province) and Indian states which might accede to be united. In the case where states accession
to the Federation was voluntary, the Federation could not be established until:

(a) A number of states, the rulers whereof were entitled to choose not less than half of the 104 seats of
the Council of state, and

(b) The aggregate population whereof amounted to at least one half of the total population of all the
Indian States had acceded to the Federation. The terms on which a state joined the Federation were to
be laid down in the Instrument of Accession.

The Federal Executive:

Dyarchy, rejected by the Simon Commission, was provided for in the Federal Executive. Defence, External
Affairs, Ecclesiastical Affairs and the administration of the Tribal Areas were reserved in the hands of the
Governor-General to be administered by him with the assistance of maximum of three Councillors to be
appointed by him. The other federal subjects would be administered by the Governor-General with the
assistance and advice of the Council of Ministers (not more than ten) to be appointed by him and to hold office
during his (Governor-General) pleasure and to be responsible to the Federal Legislature.

The Governor-General had special responsibilities regarding certain specified subjects. For example, in respect
of prevention of any grave menace to the peace and tranquillity of India or any part thereof in respect of these
subjects he had the full freedom to accept or reject the advice of the Ministers. The position of the Council of
Ministers was only ornamental rather than of any practical use.

The Federal Legislature:

The Federal Legislature was constituted of two Houses, the Council of State and the Federal Assembly. The
Council of State was to be a permanent body with one-third of its membership being vacated and renewed
triennially. It was to consist of 156 elected members of British India and not more than 104 from the Indian
states (to be nominated by the rulers concerned).

The Federal Assembly whose duration was fixed for five years was to consist of 250 representatives of British
India and not more than 125 members from the Indian states. The members to the Federal Assembly were to be
elected indirectly by the members of the Provincial Legislative Assemblies through the system of “proportional

1
http://www.historydiscussion.net/articles/main-provisions-of-the-indian-act-of-1935-and-its-
achievements/2605, retrieved on 2nd February, 2019.
representation with the single transferable vote”. The members from the states were to be nominated by the
rulers.

Residuary legislative powers were vested in the Governor-General in the matter of the enlistment of subjects
either in the Federal legislative list or the Provincial legislative list or the concurrent legislative list. The powers
of the legislature were ‘cribbed, cabined and confined.’ The Federal legislature was not allowed to deal with the
laws affecting the British sovereign, or the royal family, or matters concerning the Army Act, the Air Force Act
or laws for the amendment to the 1935 Act. Discriminatory legislation against British commercial, or other
interests, was banned.

Besides there were many subjects of importance on which legislation could not be initiated without the previous
sanction of the Governor-General. Any rejected items of the budget could be placed, by the direction of the
Governor-General before the Council of State. In case of difference between two houses, the Governor-General
could summon a joint sitting and even if a Bill was passed by both the houses he could veto the Bill and return it
back for reconsideration or reserve it for his Majesty’s consideration.

The main feature of the Act of 1935 was the provision for the responsible Government with safeguards. The Act
made the Governor-General the pivot of the entire Constitution. The Governor-General had the jurisdiction to
give the unity and to direct to different conflicting elements. The Governor-General acted in three different ways
or capacities. Normally he was to act on the advice of his ministers. He had the right to act on his individual
judgment as well. His special responsibility was to safeguard the financial stability and credit of India, the
maintenance of law and order, and the protection of the minorities and the public servants were some other
duties of the Governor-General. A Federal Court was established and it was given exclusive original jurisdiction
in disputes between the Federation the Provinces and the states joining the Federation.

The States’ accession to the Federation was voluntary. The terms on which a state joined the ‘Federation of
India’ were to be laid down in an instrument of accession. The rights and obligations of the British Crown in
respect of the Indian states were to remain unaffected and were left in charge of the Crown Representative. It
was permissible to combine the office of Governor-General and Crown Representative in the same person.

Both, the Federal legislature and the state legislatures were given their own quota of representation. But the
members from the state legislature were not selected by the election method. In spite of such wide ranging
provisions, the Princes of the Native States however refuse to join the Federation. They were alarmed by the
changing situation in the country caused by the rapid spread of the national independence movement.

They apprehended that achievement of “democratic freedom” by the people of British India would undermine
the autocratic rule in their own state. They also feared that accession to the Federation would bring them under
the authority of the Federal Government of India with respect to some essential matters.

Provincial Autonomy:
As in the case of the Federation, the Executive authority of a province was vested in a Governor appointed to
represent the Crown in the province. His position was largely modelled on the Governor-General. The
administration of the Provincial affairs was to be ordinarily carried on by a Council of Ministers appointed by
the Governor from among the elected members of the Provincial legislature and they were responsible to them
only. The ministers held office so long as they enjoyed the pleasure of the Governor.

The Governor not only acted as the constitutional head of the province acting on the advice of the Council of
Ministers, he had some special responsibilities regarding the maintenance of peace or tranquillity of the
province also. In the discharge of his special responsibilities, he was authorized to act in several matters in his
discretion without consulting his ministers and to give his individual judgment. In that case, he was to only
consider the advice of the Council of Ministers. The Governor had enormous powers which included many
legislative powers as well as over non-votable items comprising about 40% of the budget. He could, by a
proclamation, take the entire or partial government of the province into his own hand.

Provincial Legislature:
The constitution of the Provincial legislature varied from province-to-province. In the Provincial Assemblies, all
members were directly elected by the people. In provinces like Madras, Bombay, Bengal, U.P., Bihar and
Assam there was bicameral legislature consisting of a Legislative Council and a Legislative Assembly and in
each of these Legislative Councils, the Governor had the power to nominate some members.

There were 50 seats in North-West Frontier Province, 60 each in Orissa and Sindh, 108 in Assam, 112 in
Central Provinces, 152 in Bihar, 175 each in the Punjab and Bombay, 215 in Madras, 228 in the United
Provinces and 250 in Bengal. The separatist system of representation by religious communities and other groups
was a prominent feature of the Act of 1935. The electoral procedure was governed by the Communal award of
the British Government as modified by the Poona Pact in respect of Scheduled Castes.

Under this arrangement, seats in the legislatures were divided among various communities and groups besides
there being separate constituencies for Muslims, Europeans, Anglo-Indians, Sikhs, Indian Christians, etc. Some
of the general seats were reserved for Scheduled Castes as well. This method of Communal award of the British
Government accentuated the Communal disharmony in the country which paved the way for the eventual
partition of India. The Act of 1935 created general disappointment of all political parties. With innumerable
checks restrictions, reservations and safeguards, the new Act was still far away from even a reasonable measure
of self-Government. The status of India was now “gradually gravitating towards that of dominion” from a
dependent colony.

The Congress President Dr. Rajendra Prasad criticized the absence of any provision for “automatic growth of
development of self-government.” He further said that “it will be a kind of federation in which unabashed
autocracy will seat entrenched in one-third of India and peep in every now and then to strangle popular will in
the remaining two- thirds.” The Muslim League led by Jinnah also rejected the Federal Scheme describing it as
“a device to withhold responsibility at the Centre.” The Act was introduced as a political solution of the
problems in order to safeguard the British financial interests in India.

The British Government failed miserable to overcome the opposition of the Indian National Congress, the
Muslim League and the Princes against the Federal Scheme. As a result, the Federal Scheme was withheld,
except for the establishment of the Federal Court and the Provincial Scheme was introduced on 1st April, 1937
causing a drastic change in the pattern of provincial politics. Madan Mohan Malaviya said that, “the statue had
somewhat a democratic appearance outwardly but it is absolutely hollow from inside.”

But whatever its limitation, the Act of 1935 marked a decisive turning point in India’s constitutional history.
Parliamentary institutions, even if in a weakened form, formed the part of the framework of the new
governmental set-up. The operative part of this Act however remained in force till 15th August, 1947 when it
was amended by Independence of India Act, 1947.

Congress Ministries:
With the end of the Civil Disobedience Movement, many Congressmen began to consider the practicability of
working along the lines of the now defunct Swaraj party. Finally the Congress decided to contest the coming
elections to be held under the new Act. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was in the favour of contesting the elections but
not of taking part in any provincial government. A Parliamentary Board was set up by the Congress to deal with
the matters concerning the elections.

Nehru however made it clear that he was not keen on Congress forming ministries but to carry the message of
the Congress to the millions of voters and to those who had been disfranchised, so as to acquaint them with their
future programme and policy. But in the election held in 1937, the Congress swept the polls as far as general or
predominantly Hindu seats were concerned. Congress ministries were formed in seven out of eleven provinces.
On 18th March, 1937 the All India Congress Committee adopted a resolution and directed the Congress
Ministers of different provinces.

The declared Congress policy was to combat the new Act and end it. Nehru reiterated that in the event of any
demand of the people being turned down by the British Government, the Congress members of the legislatures
should work inside and outside the legislatures for putting an end to the new constitution. This would inevitably
lead to a “deadlocks with the British Government and bring out still further the inherent antagonism between
British imperialism and Indian nationalism and expose the autocratic and undemocratic nature of the new
constitution.”

The Muslim League had obtained a large number of seats reserved for Muslims. The League’s offer to form
coalition ministries in the provinces was turned down by the Congress which resulted in making the gap wider
between the two political parties. Following this, Jinnah publicly proclaimed that the Congress had done nothing
for the Muslims in India. Addressing the Lucknow Session of the Muslim League in October, 1937, Jinnah said:

The present leadership of the Congress especially during the last ten years has been responsible for
alienating the Musalmans of India more and more by pursuing a policy which is exclusively Hindu and
since they have formed the Governments in six provinces where they are in a majority. They have by
their words, deeds and programme shown more and more that the Musalmans cannot expect any justice
or fair-play at their hands.

Thus, from the “classes” Jinnah went to the “masses with the cry of Islam in danger.” He accused the Congress
of killing “every hope of Hindu-Muslim settlement in the royal fashion of fascism and blamed Gandhiji for
destroying the ideal with which the Congress was started. Jinnah said:
 He (Gandhi) is the one man responsible for turning the Congress into an instrument for the revival of
Hinduism. His idea is to revive Hindu religion and establish Hindu Raj in the Country.

These type of statements of Jinnah forced the Indian politics to be bipolarized.

In spite of the hostile attitude of the British Governors of the Provinces, the bureaucracy and the Muslim
League, the Congress Ministries in eight provinces out of eleven took up radical measures for the welfare of the
people. Greater attention was paid to villages, to agriculture, to college education and to industries. Reform of
educational system, introduction of primary education, reformation of jails and enforcement of prohibition were
taken up.

Abolition of salt tax and of repressive laws came under active consideration. No distinction was made between
communities, high caste and low caste in the Congress’ administration. In this regard, Gandhiji observed:

...that a vast opportunity is at the disposal of the ministers in terms of the Congress’ objectives of
complete Independence, if only they are honest, selfless, industrious, vigilant, and solicitous for the
true welfare of the starving millions.

But the Congress Ministers were destined to be short-lived and their work was also criticized by the British
Governors and the Muslim League. In these conditions, there came a great shock by the declaration of the
Second World War. It altered the situation in a dramatic manner and forced the Congress towards a
revolutionary path.

During the period of war, Gandhiji and Jawaharlal Nehru were in the favour of supporting the British
Government for the only reason that it was a struggle between ‘Fascism’ and ‘Democracy’. But the Congress’
policy was that no co-operation was possible unless its demand that “India must be declared an Independent
nation and present application must be given to this status to the large possible extent” was met. This idea of
opposition to the British Government was projected by Subhash Chandra Bose. He believed that “only after the
defeat and breaking up of the British Empire could India hope to be free.” Due to the vital issues involved, the
Congress appointed a War Sub-Committee with Jawaharlal Nehru as the head to give leadership to the Congress
in this regard.

In October, 1939, the Congress refusing to be hood winked, demanded “that India must be declared an
independent nation and present application must be given to this status to the largest possible extent.” To this
demand, the Viceroy Linlithgow replied on October 17, 1939 in a lengthy statement, the essence of which was
that the entire constitutional scheme would be re-opened and re-examined after the war and during the
continuance of the hostilities a consultative group, on which all the diverse interests and communities of India
would be represented, would be constituted to aid the Viceroy in the Conduct of the War.

The Congress immediately declared the statement as evasive and unsatisfactory. Gandhiji declared “The
Congress had asked for bread and it had got stone, the Congress will have to go to wilderness.” On 22nd
October, 1939 the Congress Working Committee after declaring the Viceroy’s statement unsatisfactory declared
“that in the circumstances the Committee cannot possibly give any support to Great Britain for it would amount
to an endorsement of the imperialist policy which the Congress has always sought to end.” The resolution
further asked the Congress Ministries to resign, which they did forthwith. The Governors immediately
proclaimed emergency due to which the Constitution could not work and thus they assumed all the powers of
administration in their respective provinces. However, the non-Congress Ministries continued.

The bureaucracy was happy to see the Congress out of power and Muhammad Ali Jinnah asked the Muslim
League to celebrate it as the “Day of Deliverance.” Communalism was encouraged to the maximum extent even
by the government. The resignation of Congress Ministries impaired the war-effort of the Government of India
and in return the Government demonstrated to the World that the Congress, the largest representative political
organisation of India, was not co-operating the British Government in the prosecution of the War. Linlithgow
tried his best to belittle the character and objectives of the Congress and to encourage the Muslim League.

This naturally drove him to pamper the Muslim League leader Jinnah and other political personalities of the
Indian sub-continent. This directly prompted the Muslim League to pitch the demand high with the assurance
that they will be considered. The Congress, tired of the verbosity of the Viceroy, put forward its demand for a
Constituent Assembly as the only solution to India’s problems, both Constitutional and Communal. Jinnah
immediately felt foul of the suggestion and, assured of the backing of the Government, began a series of attacks
describing it as chimerical.

In a letter Jinnah said to the Viceroy on 23rd February, 1940 that the Government should not make any
commitment with regard to the future Constitution of India or any interim settlement with any other party
without the approval of the League. The Viceroy’s relation with the League annoyed the Congress as an index
of the old policy of “Divide and Rule”. The Viceroy promised to determine the future Constitution of India on
the lines most satisfactory to all parties concerned.