Vol. 13 · pages 741–745

708 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES we must distinguish the case of Indian States which are going to be incorporated into the Constitution as integral entities without any kind of modification with regard to their territory or any other matter. For instance, take Mysore, which is an independent State today and will come into the Constitution as an integral State without perhaps any kind of modifications. The other case relates to States which have been merged together with neighbouring Indian Provinces; and the third case relates to those States that are united together to form a larger union but have not been merged in any of the Indian Provinces. Now in regard to a State like Mysore there is no doubt that the Constitution of Mysore will contain a similar provision with regard to article 270 that the assets and liabilities and properties of the existing Government of Mysore shall continue to be the properties, assets and liabilities of the new Government. Therefore it is not necessary to make any provision for a case of the kind in article 270. Similarly about States which have been united together and integrated, their Covenant will undoubtedly provide for a case which is contemplated in article 270. Their Covenant may well state that the assets and liabilities of the various States which have joined together to form a new State will continue to be the assets and liabilities of the new integrated State which has come into being by the joining together of the various States. Then we come to the last case of States which have been mergd with the Provinces. With regard to that I see no difficulty whatever about article 270. Take a concrete case. If a State has been merged in an Indian Province obviously there must have been some agreement between that State which has been merged in the neighbouring Province and that neighbouring Province as to how the assets and liabilities of that merged State are to be carried over,— whether they are to vanish, whether the merged State is to take its own obligations, or whether the obligations are to be taken by the Indian Province in which the State is merged. In any case what the article says is that from the commencement of this Constitution—these words are important and I will for the moment take it that it will commence on 26th January—any agreement arrived at before that date between the Indian Province and the State that has merged into it will be the liability of the Province at the commencement of the Constitution. If, for instance, no agreement has been reached before the commencement of the Constitution, then the Central Government as well as the Provincial Governments would be perfectly free to create any

709DRAFT CONSTITUTION new obligations upon themselves as between them and the unit or merged State or any other unit that you may conceive of. Therefore, with regard to any transaction that is to take place after the commencement of the Constitution it will be regulated by the agreement which the Provinces will be perfectly free under the Constitution to make, and we need therefore make no provision at all. With regard to the other class of States, as I said, in a case like Mysore it will be independent to make its own arrangement. When that arrangement is made we shall undoubtedly incorporate that in the special part which we propose to enact dealing with the special provisions relating to States in Part III, Therefore, so far as article 270 is concerned, I think there can be no difficulty in regard to it and I think it should be passed as it stands. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : May I know it the agreement mentioned here relates only to financial agreement or does it relate to territorial agreement also ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It speaks of assets and liabilities and obligations. If, for instance, a Province has admitted a certain State and has undertaken an obligation to pay the Ruler a certain pension, that will be an obligation within the meaning of article 270. The transfer of territory will be governed by other provisions. Shri H. V. Kamath : May I know why the word “rights” mentioned in the marginal sub-head is omitted in the article ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The Drafting Committee will look into it. Shri B. Das : With regard to properties possessed by India in foreign countries, specially in the U. K. may I know why those are not included among properties in article 270 ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I think that property is subject to partition between India and Pakistan, e.g., the India Office Library, etc., I understand that is being discussed. Shri B. Das : What about the Sterling Balances ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : My Honourable Friend knows more about it than I do. [Article 270, as amended by the only amendment of Dr. Ambedkar, was added to the Constitution.]

710 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES ARTICLE 271 The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That in article 271 — (i) the words ‘for the purposes of the Government of that State’ in the two places where they occur, be omitted; (ii) the words ‘for the purposes of the Government of India’, in the two places where they occur, be omitted.” [Amendment was carried. Article 271, as amended was added to the Constitution.] * * * * * NEW ARTICLE 271-A †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I beg to move : “That the following new article be added after article 271— All lands, minerals and other things of value lying within territorial waters vest in the Union. 271-A. All lands minerals and other things of value underlying the ocean within the territorial waters of India shall vest in the Union and be held for the purposes of Union’.” This is a very important article. We are going to have intergrated into the territory of India several States which are for the time being maritime States and it may be quite possible for such States to raise the issue that anything underlying the ocean within the territorial waters of such States will vest in them. In order to negative any such contention being raised hereafter it is necessary to incorporate this article. * * * * * ‡Shri H. V. Kamath : ...Then again, the article says “All lands, minerals and other things of value underlying the ocean within the territorial waters of India “. In Schedule I we have defined the States and the territories of India. But nowhere in this Constitution have we defined what the ‘Indian territorial waters ‘are. The Constitution is silent on this point. Mr. President : It is a well-understood expression in International Law. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It is unnecessary to define it separately. * * * * * #Shri H. V. Kamath : I hope Dr. Ambedkar will clarify the position before the House proceeds to vote on this article. *CAD, Vol. VIII, 15th .Tune 1949, p. 886. †Ibid., p. 887. ‡Ibid., p. 887. #Ibid., p. 888.

711DRAFT CONSTITUTION Shri A. Thanu Pillai (Travancore States): Mr. President, Sir, I hope Dr. Ambedkar will enlighten the House as to the necessity for this provision in the form in which it is worded. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : May I ask what exactly I have to explain ? * * * * * *Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar : I would say “all lands, minerals and other things of value underlying the ocean within the territorial waters and the territorial waters of India shall vest in the Union and be held for the purposes of the Union.” An Honourable Member : What about the air ? Another Honourable Member : What about the heavens ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I gave in my speech when I moved the amendment the reasons why we thought such an article was necessary. There seems to be some doubt raised by my Honourable Friend Mr. Pillai that this might also include the right to fisheries. Now I should like to draw his attention to the fact that fisheries are included in List II—entry No. 29. Shri A. Thanu Pillai : My objection related to other matters as well. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I will come to that. I am just dealing with this for the moment. Therefore this entry of fisheries being included expressly in List No. II means that whatever jurisdiction the Central Government would get over the territorial waters would be subject to Entry 29 in List No. II. Therefore, fisheries would continue to be a provincial subject even within the territorial waters of India. That I think must be quite clear to my Honourable Friend, Mr. Pillai, now. With regard to the first question, the position is this. In the United States, as my Honourable Friend, Shri Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar said, there has been a question as to whether the territorial waters belong to the United States Government or whether they belong to several States, because you know under the American Constitution, the Central Government gets only such powers as have been expressly given to them. Therefore, in the United States it is a moot question as yet, I think, whether the territorial waters belong to the States or they belong to the Centre. We thought that this is such an important matter that we ought not to leave it *CAD, Vol. VIII, 15th June 1949, pp. 891-93.

712 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES either to speculation or to future litigation or to future claims, that we ought right now to settle this question, and therefore this article is introduced. Ordinarily it is always understood that the territorial limits of a State are not confined to the actual physical territory but extend beyond that for three miles in the sea. That is a general proposition which has been accepted by International Law. Now the fear is—I do not want to hide this fact—that if certain maritime States such as, for instance, Cochin, Travancore or Cutch came into the Indian Union, unless there was a specific provision in the Constitution such as the one we are trying to introduce, it would be still open to them to say : “Our accession gives jurisdiction to the Central Government over the physical territory of the original States; but our territory which includes territorial waters is free from the jurisdiction of the Central Government and we will still continue to exercise our jurisdiction not only on the physical territory, but also on the territorial waters, which according to the International Law and according to our original status before accession belong to us.” We therefore want to state expressly in the Constitution that when any maritime States join the Indian Union, the territorial waters of that Maritime State will go to the Central Government. That kind of question shall never be subject to any kind of dispute or adjudication. That is the reason why we want to make this provision in article 271-A. Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar : What about the ownership of the waters themselves ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : What do you want to own water for ? You may then want to own the sky above. Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar : For the manufacture of salt, etc. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Your laws will prevail over that area. Whatever law you make will have its operation over the area of three miles from the physical territory. That is what is wanted and that you get by this. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : Waters have not been included. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : According to the International Law, the territory of a State not only includes its physical territory, but also three miles beyond. Any law that you make will operate over that area.