Why was parliamentary form of government adopted for independent India? Do you agree with the opinion that Indian government is increasingly transitioning towards presidential form? Justify.

Parliamentary Form of government was enshrined under Article 74 and 75 of Indian Constitution. When constitutionmakers were electing between parliamentary vs presidential, they favoured parliamentary form due to Following Reasons: I Historical development - association with parliamentary form for 40 years under colonial government II Stability is Responsibility - In words of Ambedkar, no form of system ensure stability and responsibility to equal degree. Constitutional makers preferred 'Responsibility' over 'Stability' under presidential form. III To prevent conflict between legislature and executive arm of state IV To make executives accountable to need of citizens by making them accountable to representative v To prevent tyranny of government vi To remove executive when not enjoying support in (A-75) legislature

vi To provide checks and balance against majoritarianism and authoritarianism being Fulcra of power. Indian government - Increasingly Presidential Form (1) Reducing Productivity at Parliament - Reduced discussions and deliberation in Parliament (Bills passed at average time of 6minutes) - Guillotine Clause Frequent usage - Less no of sittings per year compared to 1952 level (From 120days in First loksabha to 26days in 16th loksabha) - Frequency in disruption all these reducing accountability of executives to parliament (2) Futile tool of accountability: - Question Hour and Zero hour was suspended in 2021 monsoon session - Ministers not providing detailed answers to the house