You are Visitor Number:

2 2 6 2 4 4

Motagu-Chelmsford Reform, 1919


Dyarchy in Provinces: Subjects of Administration were divided in two categories- Central and Provincial, Provincial were further subdivided into transferred and reserved.

Elected members in provincial council were raised to 70%.

Transferred subjects were to be governed by Governor on the aid and advice of Council of Ministers thus laid down a responsible government in narrow sphere of transferred subjects.

Relaxation of central control over provinces was done through division of subjects in Central and provincial.

Thus provinces can formulate their own budgets to raise revenue and spend it to run administration of such subjects.

It should be noted that Provinces got power by way of delegation from the Center and the central legislature retained power to legislate for the whole of India relating to any subject.

Therefore it should be mistaken for federal distribution of power.

Bicameral Indian legislature was also introduced. 60 members 34 of which elected in upper house aka Council of State and 144 members of which 104 were to be elected in lower house akaLegislative Assembly.

The electorates were however arranged on a communal and sectional basis, developing tendency of separatism further.

There were many shortcomings in this Act such as it was GG and not courts who had authority to decide whether particular subject was central or provincial or without prior consent of GG , legislature could not take up for consideration any bill relating to a number of subjects, finance was set as reserved subjects therefore many progressive measures taken by provincial government were not effective for want of funds, ICS were responsible to SoS and not to ministers, overriding powers of governors, no provision for collective responsibilities of ministers etc.

Working of Dyarchy system in provinces proved to be disaster and could not satisfy Indian aspirations and led to Non Co-operation movement.