Vol. 15 · pages 771–775

752 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. Ambedkar: If he had the judgment before him and after reading it he refers to it, I would have respected it. But to say I have misquoted or misrepresented is going too far. Dr. S. P. Mookerjee: I never said misquoted. Dr. Ambedkar: I am not going to allow this kind of a thing. Dr. S. P. Mookerjee : The point I was developing, Sir, was this. The hon. Minister referred to some case which was dealt with by the American Supreme Court—he did not read out the judgment. So far as the American judgment is concerned it is not relevant to the subject matter that we are discussing here now. The Law Minister referred to certain things which are done by the king in England; the King has prerogative powers by virtue of which he can cede certain territories. That also, I would submit, has no relevance to the topic that is under discussion today. All that we are discussing is this : can Parliament cede any portion of the territory of India without following some specific procedure which is laid down under the Constitution ? Is there any Article in the Constitution which makes a provision for the purpose of allowing Government to cede any portion of the territories within India ? That is the simple question that we have been called upon to consider. Here, Sir, If you look at Articles 2 and 3 you will see what the arrangement was when Part I of the Constitution was enacted. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Are we to understand that the hon. Member feels that cession of territory is possible under the Constitution but only the procedure under Article 3 has not been followed ? Dr. S. P. Mookerjee: There is no specific provision in respect of cession of territory under the Constitution, but even there I am prepard to concede that if by reason of a treaty the position arises that a portion of Indian territory is to be ceded, naturally somebody has got to give the final sanction to such a decision and the matter has to come before Parliament. Here you are not only ceding the territory but you are automatically adjusting the boundaries of one of your

753PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES existing States and in respect of this matter at any rate there is a specific procedure laid down under the Constitution which you are bound to follow. Mr. Deputy Speaker: It is claimed it has been followed. Dr. S. P. Mookerjee: No, Sir. Dr. Ambedkar: With your permission, Sir, I would like to clear the point in a few sentences because I am very grateful he has put the point very clearly now. The question seems to be, what is the procedure...... Dr. S. P. Mookerjee: Well, let me finish. I won’t speak for long. Dr. Ambedkar : I am not speaking, I am only explaining. Dr. S. P. Mookerjee: I thought, Sir, when the Law Minister spoke earlier also, he was explaining. Mr. Deputy Speaker: If the Hon. Minister feels he can explain a particular point he may do so. I think the procedure has been followed. The President has given his sanction, the resolution has been passed by the Assam Assembly. The recommendation of the President has been printed on the back page of the Bill. Dr. S. P. Mookerjee: I have seen that. But so far as the provision for ceding out any portion of Indian territory is concerned, that is practically bound by the provisions of Articles 1 and 2 and in such circumstances is it open to Parliament to pass a Bill ceding a portion of Indian territory ? Mr. Deputy Speaker: That is another matter. It is not one of procedure. Dr. S. P. Mookerjee : I was referring to both the matters. It is a question of functioning within the Constitution here. If you want to deal with such a case and if you find that your Constitution does not provide for such a contingency—it might have been a mistake ; you might have overlooked it—in whatever way it might have been done, the only thing which you can do is to amend the Constitution and Parliament should then take the necessary power to give effect to it.

754 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES As I said at the beginning, I am not worried so much about this particular case. Here it is a small portion of the territory which is proposed to be given to Bhutan. There may be special reasons why you should do so. There are historical reasons why such a step if approved by the Government of India and the people of this country might lead to the creation of better relationship between those people and ourselves. Mr. Deputy Speaker: It appeared from the earlier portion of the argument of the hon. Member that he was conceding the position that by virtue of entry 14 relating to treaties the power is there. It is only the question of procedure. Dr. S. P. Mookerjee: What I am prepared to concede is this. If there is war or if a treaty is entered into between two. countries, or if it is decided that a portion of our territory should be ceded or some other portion of territory which is outside India should be included in the Indian territory, there is certainly no bar to the Government of India entering into such a treaty. The whole question is how to implement it, and that is what we are discussing today. Of course, I am not speaking on the merits of the proposal. So far as the implementation goes, there is nothing in the Constitution as it stands today which empowers this Parliament to cede out any portion of the territory which is included within India that is Bharat. It is specific, clear and unambiguous. If it is thought necessary that this particular step should be taken, then what I would suggest is that this Bill should be withdrawn and a necessary amendment of the Constitution . should be made so that the thing may be done properly and constitutionally. In this instance, the territory involved is very small. It really does not matter much. But the question of principle involved is a highly important one and we should not allow even Parliament much less the executive, to be given the power to cede out this territory which is included within the framework of the Constitution unless there is some specific provision made in the Constitution in that behalf and that is strictly followed. So far as the powers of Parliament go, there is no residuary power vesting in Parliament outside the four corners of the Constitution. It is our Holy Book, Bible, Gita or whatever you may call it and you must remain

755PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES confined within its four corners. If we find that there is a lacuna which has to be covered, we should not proceed in a manner which may give rise to any feeling of fear or distrust in the minds of any section of the people but we should first amend the Constitution, withdraw this Bill and bring it up again in proper form. Dr. Ambedkar: May I clear the point ? It seems to me that Dr. Mookerjee’s observations have reduced the point to very narrow limits. He concedes, if I understand him correctly, that there is the power of ceding territory under the entries to which I have referred. I believe it is difficult to imagine a case where the cession of territory will not involve the readjustment of the boundary of some province. At least I cannot imagine a case like that. Therefore, the question is one of procedure. If a law has to be made under any of the entries in List I or II of the Seventh Schedule, the ordinary procedure is the procedure of the Bill. Is that not so ? You bring in a Bill, put it through the House in its three stages : the Bill is passed and the thing is complete. With regard to the provisions coming under Article 3, you have got to follow the necessary procedure that has been laid down there. My submission is this. In deciding whether the ordinary procedure as to Bills is applicable to this case or whether the procedure laid down in Article 3 is applicable, we have to make reference to one single point and that is this : what is the main purpose of the Bill ? Is the main purpose of the Bill to readjust the boundaries of Assam or is the main purpose of the Bill to cede territory to Bhutan and make the necessary consequantial adjustments in the boundary of Assam from which this territory is taken ? In a matter of this kind where both aspects are present (and must be present in any cession because cession must necessarily have the consequence of readjustment), my submission is that the procedure to be followed must be the procedure for carrying out the main purpose of the Bill and not the subsidiary or the incidental purpose. Although this Bill has been drafted in a way as to make readjustment of boundaries appear to be the main purpose, the real purpose is to cede the territory. That being so my submission is that the procedure which is prescribed

756 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES by the Constitution to effect laws on any of the matters mentioned in the entries to the Seventh Schedule is the correct procedure, and Government has followed the most correct procedure laid down by the Constitution. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Even if it be an adjustment of boundaries has not the prescribed procedure been followed ? The Deputy Minister of External Affairs (Dr. Keskar): It has been done. Dr. Ambedkar: If that is so, then that point also does not stand. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The procedure has also been followed as laid down in Article 3. I therefore understand Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee to say that he does not concede the right of cession under entry 14 and that is why he says that a constitutional amendment is necessary. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad (West Bangal) : rose— Mr. Deputy Speaker: I do not propose allowing hon. Members who have already spoken when this matter was raised as a point of order yesterday to speak again. *The Minister of Law (Dr. Ambedkar): I have already made a motion that this Bill be taken into consideration. All that remains for me is to say a few words in order to explain the nature of this particular measure, and the necessity for bringing it forward. The Notary Public is an official who discharges certain functions relating to certain documents which arise out of what are called ‘mercantile’ transactions. The position with regard to the Notary Public in India is that under the Negotiable Instruments Act the Government of India has got the power to appoint Notaries public in order to deal with the documents which are negotiable instruments under that Act. But there are also other mercantile transactions which create certain other mercantile documents but which are outside the purview of the Notaries Public appointed under the Indian Negotiable Instruments Act. Those Notaries *P. D. Vol. XIV, 17 August 1951, pp. 832-35.