Vol. 13 · pages 901–905

868 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES NEW ENTRY 9-A *Mr. President : There is notice of one amendment by Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena for adding one more entry ; “Cosmic energy, and scientific and industrial research and other resources needed for its production, development and use.”... Would you like to move it. Mr. Shibban Lal Saksena ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not know what it means. Mr. President : We have atomic energy; he wants to have cosmic energy also. ***** Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena : ... I hope Dr. Ambedkar will see that this lacuna is removed. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, all I can say is that if the amendment moved by my Friend Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena is at all necessary, I think we have enough power under entry No. 91 of List I to deal with that : “any other matter not enumerated in List II or List III including any tax not mentioned in either of those Lists”. That matter could be covered by this. Mr. H. V. Kamath : That would cover many of the entries in the List itself. (The motion was negatived.) †Mr. President : Entry 14. Dr Ambedkar, would you like to say anything in reply ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : No elucidation is necessary. (Entry No. 14 was added to the Union list.) ENTRY 22 ‡The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for entry 22 of List I, the following entry be substituted : — ‘22. Piracies and crimes committed on the high seas or in the air; offences against the law of nations committed on land or the high seas or in the air.’ ” The second part of this entry—“offences against the law of nations committed on land or the high seas or in the air” is new. It was an omission made in the earlier part of the draft. With regard to the first part, we are substituting the word “crimes” for “felonies and offences”, as it is the common word used in India. “Felonies and offences” are English *CAD. Vol. IX, 30th August 1949, p. 744. †Ibid., p. 745. ‡Ibid., pp. 747-748.

869DRAFT CONSTITUTION technical terms. We are also taking out of the first part, the words, “against the law of nations” because piracies and crimes are matters which can be regulated by any country by reason of its own legal jurisdiction and authority. It has nothing to do with the law of nations. ***** The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, listening to what my honourable Friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad said, I am afraid I have again to say that he has not got a very clear notion of what this entry 22 proposes to do. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : The difficulty was that Dr. Ambedkar was engaged in conversation and did not hear me. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I was no doubt engaged in conversation; but I was quite avadhan to what he was saying. My Friend first posed the question as to why we should use the term “piracy and crime” in plural. Well, the other way in which we can use piracy and crime would be in collective terms. I think in matters of this sort, where criminal legislation is provided for, it is much better not to use the word in collective form. He cited some examples, but he forgets the fact that in some cases the generic use of the term is quite sufficient; in other cases it is not sufficient. The Drafting Committee, therefore, has deliberately used the word “piracies and crimes” in plural because it is appropriate in the context in which it is used. My Friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad said as a second count against this entry that there ought to be a semi-colon after ‘Piracies’. Now, that, I think, would distort the meaning and the purport of item 22. Supposing we had a semi-colon after ‘piracies’, ‘piracies ‘ in item 22 would be dissociated from the rest of the entry. Now, if piracies are dissociated from the rest of the entries, it would mean that the centre would have the right to legislate on all piracies, including piracies in inland rivers also. It is not the intention of this entry to give to the Central Legislature the power to legislate on piracies of all sorts. The words “committed on high seas or in the air” are words which not only qualify the word “crime” but they are also intended to qualify the word “piracy”. Then, the third count of my friend was that we should omit the words “on land, on high seas and in the air” after the words “offences against the law of nations”. That would not make it clear that the second entry is an all-pervasive entry and gives the power contrary to the first part of the entry to the Central Legislature to deal with offences against the law *CAD, Vol. IX. 30th August 1949, pp. 750-751.

870 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES of nations, not merely on the high seas and is the air but also on land. In other words, the States will have no kind of power so far as the second part of the entry is conderned. I, therefore, submit that the entry as proposed carries the intention of the draftsman and no amendment is necessary. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : The honourable Member has not heard me. What about offences committed against the law of nations, which is neither on land, nor on high seas, nor in the air, but in the low seas? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It can only be in his imagination, it cannot be anywhere else. Sardar Hukam Singh (East Punjab : Sikh) : If piracies are not dissociated from the remaining items, then would these words ‘in the air’ also qualify the word ‘piracy’ ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : There may be piracies in the air also. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Piracies are always on water, never on land or in the air, Mr. President : I will now put the amendments to vote. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I would like only the last one to be put to vote. [Except the amendment of Dr. Ambedkar, other amendments were negatived Entry 22, as amended was added to the Union List.] ENTRY 26 The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for entry 26 of List I the following be substituted :— ‘26. Import or export across customs frontiers; definition of customs fron tiers.’ ” This is just a re-arrangement of the original entry. ***** Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : ...The word “and” in “import and export” in my amendment is most important. As I have said already this is more or less of a drafting nature and therefore I would leave it to the Drafting Committee to deal with it without having my motion put to the House. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I am content with clarity and I do not wish to run after elegance. [The amendment was adopted. Entry 26, as amended, was added to the Union List.] *CAD, Vol. IX, 30th August 1949, p. 752.

871DRAFT CONSTITUTION ENTRY 26-A ***** Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena : Sir, there have been cases in the Supreme Court of America on this subject and I would like it to be clearly stated. I would therefore like to move my amendment. Sir, I move : “That after entry 26 of List I, the following new entry be added :— * 26-A. Ownership of and dominion over the lands, minerals, and other things of value underlying the ocean seaward of the ordinary low watermark on the coast exceeding three nautical miles.’ ” ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : This matter is already covered, if I may say so, by article 271 A. My difficulty is : my friend Prof. Shibban Lal’s amendment speaks of ownership. Now, in all these legis lative lists, we only deal with power to make law, not power to appro priate. That is a matter which is regulated by another law, and not by legislative entries. I therefore cannot accept it. Mr. President: He has referred to a judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, but I think that is based on the absence of something like article 271-A of our Constitution. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: We discovered that there was no entry and this was therefore a matter of doubt and in order to clear that doubt we put in 271 A. It is practically a verbatim reproduction of Mr. Shibban Lal’s amendment. ENTRY 31 †Mr. President : I find there are some amendments to entry 31. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for entry 31 of List I the following entry be substituted : ‘31. Highways declared to be national highways by or under law made by Parliament.’ ” It is just transposition of words to make the matter clear. [Entry 31, as amended, was added to the List] ENTRY 37 ‡The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : ** That in amendment 12 of List I, in entry 37, for the words ‘by air or by sea’ the words ‘by railway, by sea or by air’ be substituted”. This is just caused by an omission. *CAD, Vol. IX, 30th August 1949, pp. 753-754. †Ibid., p. 754. ‡Ibid., p. 755.

872 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : Sir, I beg to move : “That in amendment No. 12 of List I (Sixth Week), in entry 37 of List I. for the words ‘by railway, by sea or by air’ (proposed to be substituted), the words ‘by land, sea or air’ be substituted”. ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I am afraid I cannot accept the amendment moved by Dr. Deshmukh, because if we include it, it will become a central subject. Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : If it is between two provinces? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That will come under interState traffic. Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : I am prepared to withdraw my amendment. (The amendment ws, by leave of the Assembly, withdrawn.) (Shri H. V. Kamath did not press his amendment.) ENTRY 38 †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for entry 38 of List I, the following entry be substituted : — ‘38. Railways.’ ” I think this change requires some explanation. If honourable Members will turn to entry 38 as it stands in the Draft Constitution, they will notice in the first place the distinction made between Union railways and minor railways. The distinction was necessary because, in respect of the Union railways, the Centre would have the authority to legislate with regard to safety, minimum and maximum rates and fares, etc. The responsibility of actual administration as carriers of goods and passengers, in respect of minor railways, was limited. In other words, so far as maximum and minimum rates and fares, station and service terminal charges etc. are concerned, they were taken out of the jurisdiction of the Central legislature. It is felt that it is desirable that, as the railway service is one uniform service throughout the territory of India, there should be a single legislative authority to deal with railways in all matters on a uniform basis. Consequently the entry in the First Part is now extended to all railways including minor railways. Again, as legislation is intended to be uniform, it is felt that it is unnecessary to retain the second part of the entry which makes a distinction between Union railways and minor railways. I might also say that this entry is purely a legislative entry. It is not an entry which deals with ownership. That means that even if the Centre had *CAD, Vol. IX, 30th August 1949, p. 757. †Ibid., p. 757.