Vol. 10 · pages 681–685

660 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES (b) What are the grounds for fixing the rents lower than the prewar rental value as assessed by the New Delhi Municipal Committee in 1938-39 ? (c) How do Government justify the levy of house-tax at an excessive rate for all these years ? (d) If the assessment was not excessive, how do Government justify the order of the Rent Controller ? (e) Is he aware that the house-owners in this area are mostly middle class people who have been hit hard by this arbitrary decision of the Rent Controller ? (f) What rents are fixed by the Rent Controller for houses having approximately a similar residential accommodation near the Pusa Road in Qarol bagh Area, and in any other composite area in New Delhi ? (g) Is he aware that while controlling rents of houses in Calcutta, the Bengal Government have allowed an increase of ten per cent. in rents over the rents prevailing in 1941 ? (h) Does he propose to allow a similar increase in rents in New Delhi ? If not, why ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (a) (i). There are several different classes of tenements in the Babar Road Area carrying different rents. The rent of Rs. 42-8-0 is for one class tenements only. (ii) Yes. (b) The rents are fixed under clause 8 of the Delhi House Rent Control Order, 1939, under which the Rent Contoller has to fix the fair rent of a house having regard to the prevailing rates of rents for the same or similar accommodation in similar circumstances during the twelve months prior to the 1st September, 1939. (c) This is not a matter for Government. (d) In view of the reply to part (b) above, the question does not arise. (e) Yes, but Government have no reason to believe that the house-owners have been hit hard. (f) There are no houses in Qarol bagh having the same or similar accommodation. (g) I have no official information on the point. (h) No, Government do not see any justification for it. Sardar Sant Singh : Will the Honourable Member make inquiries as to the difference in rental value assessed by the New Delhi Municipal

661L. A. DEBATES (CENTRAL) QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Committee and the rent which is allowed to the owner and see that some justice is done to the landlords and the rents are increased ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot do that, because the fair rent is fixed by the officer. There is no reason to supose that his judgment is in any way miscarried by any circumstances which he ought not to take into account. 93 * Prohibition of Constructions Involving Use of Cement, Steel and Timber 135. Sir Abdul Halim Ghuznavi : (a) In view of the Government order announced in some places by beat of drums prohibiting constructions of all descriptions involving the use of cement, steel and timber, will the Honourable Member for Labour be pleased to state whether this order applies to constructions which are nearing completion and do not require cement, steel and teak wood ? (b) If the answer to (a) is in the negative, will the owners of such premises be granted permission for making and fitting the requisite panels for doors and wood-sashes for windows out of mango wood and other materials already in their possession, provided that the authorities are satisfied after verification that all the materials required are already in their stock ? (c) If the answer to (b) is in the affirmative, do Government propose to issue instructions to that effect to all provinces ? If not, will all constructions, irrespective of whether they involve the use of cement, steel and timber, be kept in abeyance now ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (a) to (c) In order to curtail the demand for labour and materials and to check inflationary tendencies, the Government of India have asked the Provincial Governments to do what they can to discourage the construction of buildings, etc., by local bodies and private persons. These are general instructions and the Provincial Governments are at liberty to give effect to them in whatever manner they consider suitable having regard to the conditions prevailing in the Province. I would therefore suggest that *Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. III of 1943, 2nd August 1943, pp. 273-74.

662 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES the Member approaches the Provincial Government whose orders he desires to have clarified. Mr. Lalchand Navalrai : May I know if these things have been prohibited because they are being supplied for war purposes or they have been prohibited for some other reason ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : For war purposes. Sir Abdul Halim Ghuznavi : May I inform the Honourable Member that the District Magistrate of Mathra has refused permission to an Honourable Member of this House to complete his house. He wanted to put in only 22 panels of mango and 22 panels for doors. That was the only thing to be done, but the District Magistrate refused to give the permission. Mr. Chairman (Syed Ghulam Bhik Nairang): That is a statement of facts and not a question. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am glad to receive the information. Sir Abdul Halim Ghuznavi : Is it a fact that the Commissioner of Agra Division was approached in this connection and he said that if the gentleman concerned could convince the District Magistrate that he already had in his possession the necessary wood to complete the house, he would give him the sanction. He convinced the District Magistrate that he had the ncessary wood in his possession and yet he refused to give him the permission. Mr. Chairman (Syed Ghulam Bhik Nairang) : Again it is a statement and not a question. Mr. Lalchand Navalrai : May I know if the half-completed house or three-fourths completed houses have also been prohibited from being built? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I have no information on the point. Mr. Lalchand Navalrai : Have any exceptions been made in this matter? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : We have given general instructions to the provinces.

663L. A. DEBATES (CENTRAL) QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Mr. Lalchand Navalrai : They have not been given any discretion ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am sure the discretion will be exercised with due care. Mr. Lalchand Navalrai : Then the Central Government has not given any instructions yet ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot say at this stage. 94 * Cost of Raising Buildings in New Delhi and Simla Connected with War Activities 144. Sardar Sant Singh : Will the Honourable the Labour Member please state the total cost incurred by the Government of India in raising buildings in New Delhi and Simla, separately, connected with the War activities since September 1939 ? Was any expense incurred on behalf of Americans ? If so, how much, and who met it ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The following expenditure had been incurred up to the end of March 1943 : (i) New Delhi—Rs. 1,55,14,629. (ii) Simla—Rs. 24,65,137. (iii) On behalf of Americans—Rs. 38,47,916. (This has been debited to Defence Services Estimates under Reciprocal Lease/Lend arrangements.) Maulana Zafar Ali Khan : May I know if after the war all these temporary buildings will be demolished ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes. Sardar Sant Singh : Which Government meets the expenditure of Rs. 38,47,916 on Americans ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The government of India under the reciprocal Lease/Lend arrangements. Sardar Sant Singh : Will this expenditure on the tax-payers of India be later on debited to the accounts ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Notice. * Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. III of 1943, 2nd August 1943, p. 282.

664 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES 95 * Factories Adversely Affected by the Former Standard Time @151. Qazi Muhammad Ahmad Kazmi : (a) Will the Honourable the Labour Member please state which factories (and in which part of the country) were adversely affected by the former standard time which used to be observed in India ? (b) What is the number of such factories, and what is the estimated amount of loss to those factories caused by the keeping up of the standard time? (c) Do Government propose to consider the advisability of restoring the old standard time ? If so, why not ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (a) Government have no information that factories in any part of India were adversely affected by the former standard time. (b) Does not arise. (c) The reply to the first part is in the negative. The reasons for the advance of time have been explained by Government in a Press communique a copy of which is laid on the table of the House. No grounds have been shown for a restoration of the old standard time. Press Communique The existence of two different standards of time in India is for purposes of defence undesirable and since the 15th May this year a uniform standard time has been observed throughout the country. In deciding what that standard should be the Government have had to consider on the one hand the convenience of that portion of India which lies to the West of meridian 82½ and already enjoys sufficient daylight saving and on the other the requirements of the eastern Provinces where it is essential to avoid any electricity overload due to overlap of factory demands with those of domestic, office and street lighting and where extra daylight may be needed to mitigate the effect of obscuration. Since in the summer months there is an adequate margin of daylight in the eastern areas, it was considered that by an adjustment of office * Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. III of 1943, 2nd August 1943. p. 285. @ Answer to this question laid on the table, the questioner being absent.