Vol. 10 · pages 701–705

680 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The position is just the reverse. The tree was cut at the instance of the occupant of the quarter. Seth Yusuf Abdoola Haroon : Will the Honourable Member make a reference to the occupant of the quarter ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I have no reason to suppose that the information I have given is not correct. Nawabzada Muhammad Liaquat Ali Khan : What reason has the Honourable Member to suppose that the information given by an Honourable Member of this House is not correct ? Mr. President (The Honourable Sir Abdur Rahim) : That is arguing. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I have official information. I don’t know how reliable is the source of the Hon. Member’s information. 112 * The Indian Trade Unions (Amendment) Bill The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Labour Member): Sir, I beg to move for leave to introduce a Bill further to amend the Indian Trade Unions Act, 1926. Mr. President (The Honourable Sir Abdur Rahim) : The question is : “That leave be granted to introduce a Bill further to amend the Indian Trade Unions Act, 1926” The Motion was adopted. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I introduce the Bill. 113 @ Equalization of Rates of Allowance for Men and Women under the Indian War Injuries Scheme 47. Mr. N. M. Joshi : (a) Has the attention of the Honourable the Labour Member been drawn to the fact that the difference made between the rates of allowances paid to men and women under the War Injuries Schemes in Great Britain has been removed some time back so that men and women receive allowances at the same rates ? * Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. IV of 1943, 8th November 1943, p. 30. @ Ibid., 9ih November 1943, p. 68.

681L. A. DEBATES (CENTRAL) QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (b) If the reply to the above be in the affirmative, do the Government of India propose to make a similar change in the Indian War Injuries schemes, and to bring the rates of allowances paid to men and women on the same level ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (a) Since notice of this question was received, I have ascertained the position in Great Britain. It is a fact that the distinction between rates for relief for men and women has been abolished in Great Britain. (b) The question will be considered. 114 * Insertion in Government Contracts of Condition for Fair Treatment of Labour 48. Mr. N. M. Joshi : Will the Honourable the Labour Member be pleased to state whether the subject of the need for insertion in Government contracts of a condition regarding fair treatment of labour was discussed at one of the Tripartite Labour Meetings ? If so, what action do the Government of India propose to take on the subject ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes, it was at the third meeting of the Standing Labour Committee. To be precise the subject discussed was need for insertion of a condition regarding fair wages for labour in Government contracts, and not fair “treatment” of labour. Government have already accepted the principle so far as the Central Public Works Department is concerned and the necessary preliminary steps for enforcing such a provision are under active consideration. The question or the introduction of such a clause in the contracts of other Government Departments will be taken up soon after the scheme has been introduced in respect of Central Public Works Department labour. Mr. Hooseinbhoy A. Lalljee : What is the meaning of “active consideration” ? Is there any time limit involved ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes; I see quite clearly the difference between a matter being under consideration and under active consideration. Mr. Hooseinbhoy A. Lalljee : Is there any difference of time ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That means that the matter is really nearing completion. * Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. IV of 1943, 9th November 1943, p. 68.

682 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES 115 * Rules Concerning “Out of Class” Allottees in New Delhi 49. Maulvi Muhammad Abdul Ghani : (a) Will the Honourable the Labour Member please state whether it is a fact that before the introduction of the revised rules for allotment of residences in New Delhi during the war, persons who were allotted quarters were allowed as a concession to remain in occupation of those quarters after they became out of class, when no accommodation of the class to which they were entitled was available ? (b) If the answer to (a) is in the affirmative, what are the reasons for penalising the same occupants by the introduction of the proviso below rule 7 (2) (b) by relegating them to a junior position by treating the dates on which they became out of class as the dates of their posting ? (c) Is it not a fact that by the operation of the proviso referred to in (b) above, the persons remain longer in occupation of the lower class of quarters and thus great hardship is caused to persons who are entitled to those quarters under revised rule 4 by compelling them to wait longer than it would be necessary had the proviso not been in operation ? (d) Does the Honourable Member propose to reconsider, and to remove the grievances of all concerned by deleting the proviso below rule 7 (b) under lists II and III. (e) Does the Honourable Member realise that by the introduction of the new policy viz., determination of seniority as regards the claim for quarters by the total length of service, practically all new entrants to whatever class of quarters they were entitled will have to go without quarters and be put to great hardship ? (f) With a view to redressing their grievance, does he propose to consider the feasibility of amending the rule so as to allow the counting of seniority from the date of posting in the case of new entrants who have not been allotted any quarter so far and in the case of others from the date on which they became out of class ? * Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. IV of 1943, 9th November 1943, pp. 68- 69.

683L. A. DEBATES (CENTRAL) QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (g) If the amendments suggested were accepted, will they be given immediate effect? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (a) Yes. (b) The penalising arises more from the shortage of accommodation than from the proviso to rule 7(2)xx(b). (c) Yes, but this cannot be helped under the existing circumstances. (d) No. Nothing can remove the grievances unless there is increased accommodation at the disposal of Government, which does not seem to be possible so long as the war lasts. (e) I do not consider that this is the case, but so long as the accommodation available is short of requirements, whatever rules are made, some persons are bound to be put to hardship. (f) This is already provided for in the rules. (g) Does not arise. 116 * Supply of Foodgrains to Employees of the Labour Department in Bengal at Concession Rates 5. Mr. K. C. Neogy : (a) Will the Honourable Member for Labour be pleased to state the different classes of employees under the control of his Department and employed in Bengal that are in the enjoyment of a concession under which foodgrains are supplied to them at controlled or reduced prices ? (b) What is the total number of such employees and what quantities of rice, wheat and other foodgrains have been supplied to them at controlled or reduced prices, month by month, since January last ? (c) Who are charged in Bengal with the duty of furnishing supplies for the benefit of these employees and what is the approximate extent of the stocks that they had to maintain from time to time to enable them to discharge their obligation, and through what agencies in Bengal have these stocks been acquired, and at what prices on an average, month by month ? * Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. IV of 1943, 9th November 1943, p. 81.

684 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The attention of the Honourable Member is invited to reply given by the Honourable the Food Member to starred question No. 55 on the 9th November 1943. 117 * Certain Irregularities in the Working of the Payment of Wages Act 130. Mr. Lalchand Navalrai : (a) Will the Honourable Member for Labour be pleased to state the number of irregularities detected by the Conciliation Officer (Railways) and Supervisor of Railway Labour, during the years 1939-40 and 1940-41, in the working of the Payment of Wages Act ? If there is an increase during the latter year, what steps do Government propose to take besides reporting to Railway administrations concerned to remedy this ? If none, why ? (b) Will the Honourable Member please give a reference to the specific provision of the Payment of Wages Act, or rules framed thereunder, sanctioning the course of reporting irregularities to Railway administration instead of to the authorities set up under Section 15 of the Act ? (c) If there is no such provision, why is not action taken under Section 15(3) of the Payment of Wages Act by Labour Inspectors ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (a) The number of irregularities detected during 1939-40 and 1940-41 were 3,012 and 4,158, respectively, Railway Administrations have recently been directed to take suitable steps to obviate the recurrence of these irregularities. If the irregularities continue to increase, the question of making formal applications under Section 15 of the Act will be considered. Government does not consider it necessary to proceed formality under the provisions of that Section when satisfactory settlement in the individual cases can be otherwise achieved. (b) There is no such provision in the Payment of Wages Act or the rules framed thereunder. * Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. IV of 1943, 13th November 1943, pp. 230-31.