Vol. 13 · pages 916–920

883DRAFT CONSTITUTION to pick out a part of the legal profession and to put it here so as to make any legislation with regard to legal profession in so far as it relates to practice of persons before High Courts an exclusive subject for legislation by the Centre, and the reason why we did it was because of the hard cases referred to by my friend Mr. Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar and I may repeat one of them. Probably you have not heard what he said. Supposing, for instance, a lawyer or a barrister from Madras appears in a case in the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court instead of deciding the case remanded the case to Bombay High Court. What happens ? The Bombay Government or Bombay law if enacted under entry 17 may not permit a person from Madras to appear in the Bombay High Court, with the result that one Madras, Lawyer who appeared in the Supreme Court conducted the whole case but if the case is remitted back to the High Court of Bombay, that High Court may by law prevent him from appearing before it. I think it will be agreed that is a great hardship. In order therefore to have a uniform position with regard to persons practising in different High Courts what this entry proposes to do is to cut it from entry 17 dealing with professions and to put it here so that the practice of persons appearing in the High Court may be regulted by uniform law. There is nothing revolutionary and there is nothing surreptitious in entry 52 as is proposed by the Drafting Committee. Mr. President : I will now put the amendments to vote. (All amendments except that of Dr. Ambedkar as given before, were rejected.) [Entry 52 as amended was added to the Union List] ***** ENTRY 53 *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Bombay : General) : Sir, I move : “That in Entry 53 of List I, the words and the figure ‘except the States for the time being specified in Part III of the First Schedule’ be omitted.” This is because we propose to make no distinction between a State in Part I and Part III. Shri H. V. Kamath (C.P. & Berar : General) : There is a little amendment of mine, No. 198. Sir, I move : “That with reference to amendment No. 25 of List I (Sixth Week), in entry 53 of List I, for the words and exclusion of the jurisdiction of any such High Court from, the words ‘ and exclusion from the jurisdiction of any such High Court of be substituted.” *CAD, Vol. IX, 31st August 1949, pp. 783-784.

884 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES This is only an interposition of words, I know, but it changes the meaning slightly and brings out what is intended in the entry. I believe that this entry has reference to exclusion from the jurisdiction of any High Court of certain areas.... The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, Mr. Kamath’s amendment is wholly unnecessary because the object of my amendment is to delete altogether that portion of entry No. 53 beginning from “except” to the end. If I was retaining any part of the entry then of course the question might arise whether the phraseology used in the entry is better than the one suggested by Mr. Kamath or vice versa. Shri H. V. Kamath : My amendment has reference to the entry itself not to the amendment. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I think that cannot arise because I am omitting the whole thing. The second point is that the language used in entry 53 has to be in keeping with the language employed in article 207. Shri H. V. Kamath : If this is accepted the language in the other article which has already been passed will have to be amended—at the third reading. Mr. President : I find that Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment refers only to a part of this entry. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am taking out the last part “except the States for the time being specified in Part III of the First Schedule”. The entry as amended would stand: “Extension of the jurisdiction or of a High Court having its principal seat in any State within the territory of India to and exclusion of the jurisdiction of any such High Court from, any area outside that State.” The entry merely provides for the extension or the exclusion of the jurisdiction. Shri H. V. Kamath : My amendment refers to the second part, “exclusion of the jurisdiction of any such High Court from any area outside that State”. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am not accepting your quibbling. Shri H. V. Kamath : It is no quibble. It is a question of correct English. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : If it is a matter of mere English we can take it up at the next stage. Mr. President : Then I shall put Mr. Kamath’s amendment to vote. (The amendment was negatived.)

885DRAFT CONSTITUTION Mr. President : I shall now put Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment to vote. (The amendment was adopted.) ***** ENTRY 56 The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I move : “That for entry 56 of List I the following entry be substituted :— ‘56. Inquiries, surveys and statistics for the purpose of any of the matters in this List There is hardly any difference. We have merely made it “for the purpose of any of the matters in this List”. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad (West Bengal : Muslim) : Though my amendment No. 167 will improve the text, I do not want to move it. (Amendment No. 254 was not moved.) Shri Phool Singh (United Provinces: General) : Mr. President, Sir, the amendment suggested by Dr. Ambedkar will limit the scope of this entry...,With these few words 1 request Dr. Ambedkar to reconsider the situation. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I think the fear expressed by my friend is somewhat groundless and arises from the fact that he has not adverted to the fact that all other inquiries and so on relating to the States, and other matters, are now put in the Concurrent List. So there is no absence of any such purpose that he wants. (Entry 56, as amended, was added to the Union List.) ENTRY 51 †The Honourable Dr. B.R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for entry 57 of List I, the following be substituted : ‘57. Union agencies and Union institutes for the following purposes, that is to say, for research, for professional, vocational or technical trining, for scientific or technical assistance in the investigation or detection of crime, for the training of police officers, or for the promotion of special studies’.” The entry is somewhat enlarged by the introduction of the words “vocational training” and “investigation or detection or crime, for the training of police officers” and so on. ***** ‡ Mr. President : There is an amendment to this entry 57, standing in the name of Mr. Karimuddin (No. 3544). As it is not being moved. Dr. Ambedkar may reply. *CAD, Vol. IX, 31st August 1949, pp. 784-785. †Ibid., p. 785. ‡Ibid., pp. 787-788

886 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. President, I have compared the amendments moved by my honourable Friend Mr. Kamath with the entry as proposed by me. I think except for one matter, it will be quite open to Central Government to carry out the purpose which my honourable Friend Mr. Kamath has in mind. The only thing which the Central Government will not be able to effectuate under entry 57 is spiritual research. I do not think that this House, knowing full well the various problems with which the Central Government has to carry on these days, would like to burden it with any such agency as spiritual research. The rest of the objects of the amendment will be covered by entry 57. Shri H. V. Kamath : How do you say that the administrative service officers are covered by the entry as proposed ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I think so, because the training is not only for police officers. The language used is “research, for professional, vocational or technical training”. Anything can be brought in under the above. ***** Mr. President : I will now put the entry as moved by Dr. Ambedkar in the amended form. The question is : “That for entry 57 of List I, the following entry be substituted : ‘57. Union agencies and Union institutes for the following purposes, that is to say, for research, for professional, vocational or technical training, for scientific or technical assistance in the investigation or detection of crime, for the training of police officers, or for the promotion of special studies’.” (The amendment was adopted.) (Entry 57, as amended, was added to the Union List.) ENTRY 57(A)—( contd.) *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That after entry 57 of List I, the following new entry be inserted :— “57A. Co-ordination and maintenance of standards in institutions for higher education scientific and technical institutions and institutions for research’.” This entry is merely complementary to the earlier entry, No. 57. In dealing with institutions maintained by the provinces, entry 57-A proposes to give power to the Centre to the limited extent of co-ordinating the research institutions and of maintaining the standards in those institutions to prevent their being lowered. Sir, I also move : “That in amendment No. 28 of List I (Sixth Week), in the proposed new entry 57A of List I, for the word ‘maintenance’ the word ‘determination’ be substituted.” *CAD, Vol. IX, 31st August 1949, p. 788.

887DRAFT CONSTITUTION *Shri Basanta Kumar Das (West Bengal : General) : I have an amendment No. 29. Mr. Vice-President : I thought they were new articles. Dr. Ambedkar, would you prefer that to be moved before you speak ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes. Mr. Vice-President : Mr. Das, you may move No. 29. ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. President Sir, I think there is a certain amount of admixture made by my friends who have spoken on this entry 57A. So far as I have been able to gather, their contention is that this entry 57A should be allowed only if mere was some grant made by the Central Government to the Provinces. It seems to me quite unnecessary to mix up the two matters. The question of grants from the centre to the Provinces has been dealt with in, two separate articles— 255 and 262. Article 255 provides for grants to be made by the centre to the Provinces for assistance— “Such sums, as Parliament may by law provide, shall he charged on the Consolidated Fund of India in each year as grants-in-aid of the Consolidated Fund of such States as Parliament may determine to be in need of assistance ...” Therefore, the provision for supporting the States by way of financial help is already there in article 255.1 should also like to draw the attention of the Members of the House to another important article, which is article 262, which is much wider in scope. It says— “The Union or a State may make any grants for any public purpose, notwithstanding that the purpose is not one with respect to which Parliament or the Legislature of the State, as the case may be, may make laws.” As the House will see, it has a much wider scope. It says that although a subject may not be within List I, none-the-less, Parliament would be free to make a grant. Therefore, this question having been dealt with sepa rately, I think there is no necessity to mix it up with entry 57A. Entry 57A merely deals with the maintenance of certain standards in certain classes of institutions, namely, institutions imparting higher education, scientific and technical institutions, institutions for research, etc. You may ask, “Why this entry ?” I shall show why it is necessary. Take for instance the B.A. Degree examination which is conducted by the different Universities in India. Now, most Provinces and the Centre, when advertising for candidates, merely say that the candidate should be a graduate of a university. Now, suppose the Madras University says that a candidate at the *CAD, Vol. IX. 31st August 1949, p. 793. †Ibid., p. 796.