Vol. 13 · pages 951–955

918 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES We have distributed this entry, kept apart in List I and the other part is now placed in List II. (Entry 10-A was added to the State List) ENTRY 12 *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for entry 12 of List II, the following entries be substituted:— ‘12. The salaries and allowances of Ministers for the State, of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, and if there is a Legislative Council, Council of the Chairman and Deputy Chairman thereof; the salaries and allowances of the members of the Legislature of the State.’ ‘12-A. The priviledges, immunities and powers of the Legislative Assembly and of the members and the Committees thereof and if there is a Legislative Council, of that Council and of the members and the Committees thereof.’ ” This is merely a counterpart of what we have done so far as List I is concerned regarding the Centre. (Entries 12 and 12-A were added to the State List) ENTRY 14 †Mr. President : Now the question is whether we should have an additional entry as “Regulation and control of Houses and Rents”. Mr. Tyagi, you move it as a separate entry. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes, he may move it as a separate entry. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : I am grateful to you and also to Dr. Ambedkar. He has for the first time been generous to me. Sir, I do submit that it is really embarrassing to move an amendment to the list which has been submitted by the Drafting Committee, for the Drafting Committee is always very resourceful and it is very difficult to struggle with them successfully. Mr. President : But you are moving an additional entry. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : Yes, Sir, but the acceptance of the Drafting Committee has to be sought After all it is primarily they who accept suggestions, and if they accept them, then the House readily agrees to them. The House has already agreed to one entry which says that all the residuary powers will go to the Centre, all that is not mentioned in List II or List III. I submit that the control of Houses in urban areas and the control of rents of those houses are an important matter today. It was not *CAD, Vol. IX, 1st September 1949, p. 871. †Ibid., pp. 873-874.

919DRAFT CONSTITUTION in the original list of the Government of India Act 1935, because at that time the control over the houses and their rents was not needed and it was not prevalent in India. But... The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I understand the honourable Member’s argument and I could reply to him in a few minutes. Shri Mahavir Tyagi: Yes, and I therefore only submit that this subject of control of the houses and the control of the rents should be there. I would even go further and say that the control of good grains also should come in. If the House agrees, it may be brought in as an independent item somewhere. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, there are, I think three distinct questions, although they have not been stated by Mr. Tyagi in that form. The first question is whether the Provincial legislature should or should not have any power to regulate and control houses and house-rent. I think on that issue, there can be no difference of opinion, that the Provincial Governments must have such power. The question then is whether the Draft Constitution and the entries in the list make any provision for the provincial legislatures to exercise powers for the purpose of regulating and controlling the houses and the rents. Now, my submission is that the specific entry as proposed by Mr. Tyagi is quite unnecessary, because there are two other entries, namely entry 24 of List II which deals with “land, rights in or over land, land tenures including the relation of land-lord and tenant, and the collection of rents, etc.” That is one entry. Then there is another entry No. 8 in List III about transfer of property other than agricultural land; registration of deeds and documents. These two entries have been found to be quite sufficient to enable the Provincial Governments to make laws relating to the regulation and control of Houses and rents,—My Friend Mr. Tyagi knows also, that notwithstanding the fact that such an entry does not exist even today, under List II of the Government of India Act, none-the-less, the Provinces have enacted laws in this matter. Therefore entry 24 relating to land and the other entry. No. 8 about transfer of property are quite sufficient to give the power which Mr. Tyagi wants that they should have. Another difficulty in the way of accepting the amendment of Mr. Tyagi is this. Suppose we were now to include this entry, it would cause a certain amount of doubt on the laws that have already been made by the provinces for the purpose of regulation of houses and the control of rents. It would appear that the legislature itself felt that the entry as it already existed, was not sufficient for the purpose of giving the legislature power

920 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES to make laws for this purpose. And therefore it was necessary specifically to give this power. I think we would unnecessarily casting doubts upon the validity of laws already made. Therefore, this is an additional ground against accepting the amendment. In the first place, as I have said it is unnecessary because the provinces have got sufficient power to make such laws and the other is this question of validity of laws made. Now I come to the third part. My Friend Mr. Tyagi has been struggling to some extent when I was dealing with the question of cantonments to remove the power of allowing cantonments to regulate rents and the premises within their areas. If my friend’s intention is that by getting this entry accepted, it would be possible for the provinces to nullify the power which has already been given by the entry in List I, as it has been already passed, then I think, he is completely under a mistake. Not with standing the fact that this entry may become part of the Constitution, the entry which we have already passed would be valid; notwithstanding any power vested in the Provinces, the Cantonments will have the power to make regulations with regard to the premises and the rent of the premises situated in that area. Therefore, I submit to my Friend mr. Tyagi that his purpose is already served and it is unnecessary to have this entry, especially because it would be causing a certain amount of doubt on the validity of the laws already made under these entries as they stand. ***** *Shri Mahavir Tyagi : ....Suppose the owner of a house takes objection on the ground that the provincial government has no right to control rents, then what happens? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : No, he cannot because under the General Clauses Act, land includes the buildings. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : It is a new interpretation of the law, that land includes the building. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It is new because law is not the profession of Mr. Tyagi. ENTRY 15 †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move: “That in entry 15 of List II, the words ‘registration of births and deaths’ be deleted.” This is transferred to the concurrent list. *CAD, Vol. IX, 1st September 1949, pp. 874-875. †Ibid., p. 875.

921DRAFT CONSTITUTION ***** *The Honourable Dr . B. R. Ambedkar : I do not accept any of the amendments moved. [Amendments by Shri Kamath and Brijeshwar Prasad were rejected. The motion of Dr. Ambedkar was adopted. Entry 15, as amended, was added to the State List.] ENTRY 18 †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I move : “That for entry 18 of List II, the following entry be substituted :— ‘18. Education including universities, subject to the provisions of entries 40, 40-A, 57 and 57-A of List I and entry 17-A of List III.’ ” [All amendments to Entry 24 were rejected by Dr. Ambedkar and were negatived by the House. Entry 24 was added to the State List.] ***** Sardar Hukam Singh (East Punjab : Sikh): Sir, Now, that Pandit Bhargava has moved this amendment that this entry should be transferred to the Concurrent List there is no need for me to move my amendment and I wholeheartedly support Pandit Bhargava’s amendment. ***** ‡The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I am prepared to accept this amendment (of Pandit Bhargava as below): “That with reference to amendment No. 3626 of the List of Amendments, entry 43 in List II be transferred to List III as entry 9-A.” (The motion was adopted.) Entry 43 of List II was transferred to the Concurrent List. ENTRY 45 ***** #The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I am very much afraid that both my friends, Mr. Shibban Lal and Mr. Sahu, have entirely misunderstood the purport of this entry 45 and they are further under a great misapprehension that if this entry was omitted, there would be no betting or gambling in the country at all. I should like to submit to them that if this entry was omitted, here would be absolutely no control of betting and gambling at all, because if entry 45 was there it may either be used for the purpose of permitting betting and gambling or it may be used for the purpose of prohibiting them. If this entry is not there, the provincial governments would be absolutely helpless in the matter. *CAD, Vol. IX, 2nd September 1949, p. 880. †Ibid., p. 881. ‡Ibid., p. 914. #Ibid., pp. 917-918.

922 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES I hope that they will realise what they are doing. If this entry was omitted, the other consequence would be that this subject will be automatically transferred to List I under entry 91. The result will be the same, viz., the Central Government may either permit gambling or prohibit gambling. The question therefore that arises is this whether this entry should remain here or should be omitted here and go specifically as a specified item in list I or be deemed to be included in entry 91. If my friends are keen that there should be no betting and gambling, then the proper thing would be to introduce an article in the Constitution itself making betting and gambling a crime, not to be tolerated by the State. As it is, it is a preventive thing and the State will have full power to prohibit gambling. I hope that with this explanation they will with draw their objection to this entry. [The motion was adopted. Entry 45 was added to the State List. ] ENTRY 38— (contd.) ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: May I request you to go back to entry 38 and to amendment No. 311 standing in the name of Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra? I heard, Sir, that you were pleased to direct Mr. T. T. Krishnamachari to have this entry held back, but I am prepared to accept the amendment suggested by my honourable Friend, Pandit Maitra. Mr. President: Very well. The question is : “That entry 38 of List II be transferred to List III.” (The amendment was adopted.) Entry 38 was transferred to the Concurrent List. ENTRY 46 ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot accept this amendment. As our system of revenue assessment is at present regulated, it would upset the whole of the provincial administration. The matter may, at a subsequent stage be investigated either by Parliament or by the different provinces, and if they come to some kind of an arrangement as to the levy of land revenue and adopt the principles which are adopted in the levy of income-tax, the entry may be altered later on but today it is quite impossible. The matter was considered at great length in the *CAD, Vol. IX, 2nd September 1949, p. 918. †Ibid., p. 919.