Vol. 13 · pages 1106–1110

1073DRAFT CONSTITUTION to the Bill in the Dominion Legislature or in the Legislature of the Province or Indian State had been taken in Parliament or the Legislature of the corresponding State. 312H. The provisions of this Constitution relating to the Consolidated Fund of India or of any State and appropriation of moneys out of such fund shall not apply in relation to moneys received or raised or expenditure incurred by the Government of india or the Government of any State between the commencement of this Constitution and the thirty-first day of March, 1950, both days inclusive, and any expenditure incurred during that period shall be deemed to be duly authorised if the expenditure was specified in a scheduled in a schedule of authorised expenditure athenticated in accordance with the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, by the Governor-General of the Dominion of India or the Governor of the correspoding Province or is authorised by the Rajprmukh of the State in accordence with such rules as were applicable to the authorisation of expenditure from the revenues of the corresponding Indian State immediately before such commencement” I do not think there is anything necessary to say by way of explanation of these articles. There are two amendments Nos. 18 and 19 on the Notice Paper proposing to omit the word ‘provisional’ in articles 312A and 312B. I propose to accept these amendments in consonance with what we have already done. Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : Mr. President, I move : “That in amendment No. 16 above, in the proposed new article 312B, the word ‘provisional’, wherever it occures, be deleted.” “That in amendment No. 16 above, in the proposed new article 312A, the word ‘provisional’ where it occurs be deleted.” I am glad that the amendments are acceptable to Dr. Ambedkar. My reason for these are that it would be derogatory to the dignity of the President or the Governor to be described as ‘provisional’. I commend the amendments for the aceptance of the House. ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot accept this amendment. My Friends Mr. Kamat and Prof. Saksena have read a great deal into this article 312-E. As a matter of fact the article is of very limited importance and the question that is dealt with in this article is the determination of the population of any particular area. My friends very well know that according to the article which we have already passed the population for purposes of election is to be taken as determined by the last census. It is also accepted that having regard to the partition of India the census fgures for 1941 cannot be taken as accurate, and consequently the delimitation of constituencies and the fixation of seats cannot be based upon the truncated provinces whose population figures have been considTransactions occuring between the commencement of the Constitution and the 31st of March, 1950. *CAD, Vol. X, 7th October 1949, pP. 26-27.

1074 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES erably distrubed. Therefore, it is as well to have some one in authority to determine what the population should be taken to be and whether the population is to be taken as enumerated in the census or by a fresh enumeration or, as I said, by merely determining the population on the basis of the voting strength. These are the matters that are left to the President and I do not see what the approval of Parliament is going to do in a matter of this sort. It is a purely administrative matter necessitated by the special circumstances of the case and I think it is much more desirable to leave the matter to the President, if we want really that the elections should be expedited. I am therefore unable to accept the amendment moved by my Friend Mr. Kamath. Shri H. V. Kamath : Has Dr. Ambedkar any objection to the principle of my amendment ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not accept it. The import of this article is very limited. It is the determination of the population, not delimitation of constituencies. The delimitation of constituencies will take place according to the provisions of the Constitution. [Articles 312-A to 312-E, 312-G and 312-H as proposed by Dr. Ambedkar and as amended by Dr. P. S. Deshmukh’s amendment were adopted and added to the Constitution.] ARTICLE 313 *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for article 313, the following be substituted :— 313. (1) The President may, for the purpose of removing any dificulties, particularly in relation to the transition from the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, to the provisions of this Constitution, by order, direct that this Constitution shall, during such period as may be specified in the Order, have effect subject to such adaptations, whether by way of modification, addition or omission, as he may deem to be necessary or expedient: Provided that no such order shall be made after the first meeting of Parliament duly constituted under Chapter II of Part V of this Constitution. (2) Every order made under clause (1) of this article shall be laid before each House of Parliament.” This is a reproduction of the provision contained in the Government of India Act, which is necessary for the transition period. ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, there seems to be considerable missapprehension as to the necessity of the provisions Power of the President to remove difficulties. *CAD, Vol. X, 7th October 1949, pp. 27-28. †Ibid., pp. 30-31.

1075DRAFT CONSTITUTION contained in article 313. My Friend Dr. Deshmukh who has moved his amendment very kindly said that if I gave a satisfactory explanation as to the provsions contained in article 313 he would not press his amendment. With regard to article 313 I think certain facts will be admitted. The first fact which I expect will be admitted on all hands is this. During the transition period there are bound to arise certain difficulties which it is not possible for the Drafting Committee, or for the matter of that any Member of this House, to fully foresee right now and to make any provision. Therefore, It is necessary that there should reside somewhere some power to resolve these unforeseen difficulties. The question therefore is to what extent and up to what period these powers should be lodged in that particular authority. My friend, Dr. Deshmukh, said that under section 310 of the Goverment of India Act, the power was to last for six months. I think he is under a mistake. The power was to last for six months after Part III had come into operation. Ours is a very limited provision. The power to resolve difficulties by constitutional provisions vested by articls 313 would automatically come to an end on the day of which the new Parliament under the new provisions comes into existence. We therefore do not propose under this article to allow the President to exercise the powers given to him under 313 a day longer than the proper authority entitled to make amendments comes into being. That is one feature of this article 313. Admitting the fact that difficulties will arise and that they must be resolved and the power must vest with somebody, the question that really arises for consideration is this : whether this power should vest in the President or it should vest in the provisional Parliament. There cannot be any other alternative. The reason why the Drafting Committee has felt that it would be desirable to adopt the provisions contained in article 313 and vest the power in the President is because the duration of the transitional Parliament is so small and it might be busy with so many other matters requiring Parliamentary legislation that it would not be possible for the Parliament sitting during the transitional period to grapple with a matter which must be immediately solved. Let me give one or two illustrations of the difficulties that are likey to arise. By our Constitution we have made considerable changes in the powers of taxation of the States and Centre. On the 26th January next, when the Constitution comes into existence, the powers of taxation of the Indian States enjoyed by them under the existing Government of India Act would automatically come to an end. It would create a crisis and

1076 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES therefore this matter sould be regularised. If we were to get it regularised by the provisional Parliament, I think my friend would realise that it would take such a long time that the crisis would continue. Therefore, rather than adopt the ordinary Parliamentary procedure of having a Bill read three times, sent to Select Committee, having a consideration motion, circulation and so on, I think it is desirable, for the purpose of saving the Constitution from difficulties, to lodge this power with the President so that he may expeditiously act. Therefore, as I said, on the merits the provision is necessary. Comparing it with the provisions contained in section 310, ours is a much limited proposal, and I submit that having regard to these circumstances there cannot be any serious or fundamental objection to the House acepting article 313. With regard to the point made by my Friend Mr. Kamat, I think he will realise that there is no error on the part of the Drafting Committee in refering to the Government of India Act, 1935, without making a distinction between the original Statute and the Statute as adapted, because he will see that the Statute as adapted itself provides that its short title shall be, “Government of India Act, 1935”, and I have no doubt that it is in that sense that it will be understood when this article comes to be interpreted. Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : May I ask a question ? If the Parliament is asked to approve the order passed by the President would there be any harm ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : But “approval” means what ? It may nullity the action taken by the President, and the object of this provision is to provide an effective remedy. That way it cannot come into force quickly while what we want is that the matter should come into force at once. Mr. President: I shall put the amendments now. Amendment No. 37 moved by Dr. Ambedkar. The question is : “That in amendment No. 23 of List I (First Week), in clause (2) of the proposed article 313, the words ‘each House of ’ be deleted.” The amendment was adopted. Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendments Nos. 30, 31 and 32 but not 33. Amendments Nos. 30, 31 and 32 were, by leave of the Assembly, withdrawn. Article 313, as amended, was added to the constitution. *****

1077DRAFT CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 307 *Shri Biswanath Das : My complaint in this regard is that neither the Law Department nor the office of the Constituent Assembly have moved an inch in this regard. I expect that they should have kept ready the adaptations and examined the laws in operation. Mr. President: Without knowing what the Constitution is going to be! The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (Bombay : General) : My Friend is thoroughly misinformed. He does not know what is being done. ****** [Article 307 as amended was added to the Constitution.] ****** ARTICLE 308 †Mr. President : We go to article 308. Dr. Ambedkar. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for clause (3) of article 308 the following clause be substituted : — ‘(3) Nothing in this Constitution shall operate invalidate the exercise of jurisdiction by His Majesty in Council to dispose of appeals and petitions from, or in respect of, any judgement, decree or order of any court within the territory of India in so far as the exercise of such jurisdiction is authorised by law, and any order of His Majesty in Council made on any such appeal or petition after the commencement of this Constitution shall for all purposes have effect as if it were an order or decree made by the Supreme Court in the exercise of the jurisdiction conferred on such court by this Constitution.” Also : “That after clause (3) of article 308, the following new clause be inserted :— ‘(3a) On and from the date of commencement of this Constitution the jurisdiction of the authority functioning as the Privy Council in a State for the time being specified in Part III of the First Schedule to entertain and dispose of appeals and petitions from or in respect of any judgement, decree or order of any court within that State shall cause, and all appeals and other proceedings pending before the said authority on the said date shall be transferred to, and disposed of, by the Supreme Court.” Sir, the purpose of the first amendment is merely to continue the authority of the Privy Council to dispose of certain appeals which might be pending before it under the law which the Constituent Assembly very recently passed section 4 —in case they are not finally disposed of before the 26th January, assuming that to be the date on which this Constitution comes into existence. The important words are— “to dispose of the appeal”. There is no power to entertain an appeal. And the other important words are— “such jurisdiction authorised by law”, that is to say, references to the recent Act that was passed. The Privy Council will have no other jurisdiction, no more jurisdiction than what we have *CAD, Vol. X, 10th October 1949, p. 65. †Ibid., pp. 72-73