§ Mr. T. GRIFFITHSasked the Secretary of State for India whether under the new Reform Act now in force, whereby absolute control over finance and appointments over a wide area of government is given to the various Indian provincial councils and their elective majorities, a British-born subject can now sue for breach of contract for personal service in India; if so, whom he should sue and where for a breach in India or for a breach in this country; whether such subject will now have the right to know the medical grounds, should the India Office Medical Board certify him incapacitated 123W for further service in India; whether such contracts will be still deemed subject to the will and pleasure of the Crown; what authority or powers over such contracts is it contemplated transferring to the independent high commissioners who will represent the various Indian governments; and whether such actions as Dr. Denning recently attempted to bring will be outside the domain of the British Government?
§ Mr. MONTAGUAs regards the first part of the question, the new Act in no way affects the pre-existing right of a British-born subject to sue for breach of contract for personal service in India. As regards the second part, contracts for service under the Government of India are made with "the Secretary of State in Council." Such subject would presumably sue the Secretary of State in Council in respect of a breach either in India or in this country. The action could be brought in this country or in India according to circumstances. As regards the third part, the position will remain unaltered, in so far as an officer certified by the India Office Medical Board to be incapacitated for further service in India is not regarded as necessarily entitled to know the medical grounds on which such a certificate is given. As regards the fourth part such contracts are not subject to the will and pleasure of the Crown, except that, as stated in answer to the hon. Member's question on 2nd March, the Crown has in law the right to dispense with the services of its officers, and it would not be in the power of the Secretary of State in Council or of a government in India to alter the law in this respect or to limit this right of the Crown when entering into such contracts. As regards the fifth part, the Secretary of State in Council will remain the authority for the recruitment of those services which are now known as "all-India services" —such as the Indian Civil Service, the superior police service, the Indian educational service, and so forth, and consequently will remain the contracting party for these. Recruitment in this country of services, the members of which are now to be appointed and controlled by provincial governments, will probably be made over for the most part to the High Commissioner for India, and he would necessarily, subject to instructions he receives from the authorities in India for whom he is124W acting, have power to contract on their behalf, but in the name of the Secretary of State in Council. The answer to the last part of the question, if I correctly understand the hon. Member's meaning, is therefore that it will still be open to officers like Dr. Denning to sue the Secretary of State in Council.