Constituent Assembly Of India -Volume IX
Dated: September 03, 1949
New Entry 28-A
Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I move.
Mr. Vice-President: I will put the amendment to vote. The question is:
The motion was adopted.
Entry 28A was added to the Concurrent List.
Mr.Vice-President: As there is no amendment to entry 29, 1 win put it to 'vote.
Entry 29 was added to the Concurrent List.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: Sir, a part of this amendment of mine was very kindly accepted yesterday. But; so far as the wording is concerned, we have yet to decide it. When we were discussing the State List, it was decided that we should transfer 'adulteration food' to List III and therefore it would probably be relevant if we take up the wording of this entry at this stage. At the same, time I would like that the first amendment of mine should also be
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: May I draw attention to the fact that the introduction entry 29A has already been covered by entry 61A in List I which has been passed by the House in much wider terms ? The words used are "goods" which will include agricultural products, etc. Similarly 29B was accepted yesterday on the motion of Mr. Maitra and it is now entry 20A in List
Dr. P. S.Deshmukh
: I accept the first part of my friend's suggestion. I do not move for adding 29A. But I am not clear whether it is the were transposition of the entry as it stood in List II that is proposed ?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It is transferred to Concurrent List as 20A. That was the motion passed by the House.
Dr. P. S. : Would it not be better to enlarge its scope ?
The Honourable Dr. B.R. Ambedkar: 'Adulteration of food' includes everything, I think.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: If that is so, I do not move this amendment.
Mr. Vice-President : Then I will put entries 30 and 31 to vote.
Entries 30 and 31 were added to the Concurrent List.
New Entry 3 1 -A
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I move:
"That after entry 31, the following new entry be inserted:-
'31-A. Ports, subject to the provisions of List I with respect to major ports'."
: The question is:
"That after entry 31, the following new entry be inserted:-
'31-A.' Ports, subject to the provisions of List I with respect to major ports'."The motion was adopted.
Entry 31 was added to the Concurrent List.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I move
'That entry 32 of list III be deleted."
This has been transferred to List I.
Mr. Vice-President : The question is:
"That entry 32 be deleted.'
The motion was adopted.
Entry 32 was deleted from the Concurrent List.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I move
"That entry 33 of List III be deleted."
As I said, this also has been transferred to List I.
Mr. Vice-President : The question is:
"That entry 33 be deleted."
The motion was adopted.
Entry 33 was deleted from the Concurrent List.
Entries 33A and 33B
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I move:
"That after entry 33 of List III, the following new entries be inserted:-
'33A. Custody, management and disposal of property (including agricultural land) declared by law to be evacuee Property.
33B. Relief and rehabilitation of persons displaced from their original place of, residence by reason of the setting up of the Dominions of India and Pakistan."
(Amendment No. 296 was not moved.)
Mr. Vice-President,: The question is:
"That after entry 33 of List III, the following new entries be inserted:-
'33A. Custody, management and disposal of property (including agricultural land) declared by law to be evacuee property.
Relief and rehabilitation of persons displaced from their original place of residence by reason of the setting up of the Dominions of India and Pakistan,?." The motion was adopted.
Entries 33A and 33B were added to the Concurrent List.
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad: There is an amendment to this. After that amendment is moved, I would like to speak on this entry, Sir.
Shrimati Purnima Banerjee (United Provinces: General) : Sir, I move:
"That for entry 34 of List III, the following be substituted
34- Economic. educational and social planning.'"The reason why I have added the word "educational" is that, I think, most Members of this House would agree with me that social planning is something quite separate from educational planning and does not include the connotation of educational planning. Social planning means Planning for society which may change the structure of society upon a completely different basis. It really relates to economic planning. I therefore hope that the Drafting Committee, particularly Dr. Ambedkar, will gee the difficulty which I find. Under the Union List, the Centre has taken powers to Jay down standards of education. By entry 40 it has taken upon itself the task of running important educational institutions. By entry 40A they are going to take over scientific and technical institutions. Under 57A they are taking over co-ordination and maintenance of educational standards in institutions for higher education. If all these the Union seeks to do, I am certain that the Union should also have powers for educational planning all over the provinces.
While discussing the Union List, some friends went to the extent of saying that university education should be entirely a Union subject. I do not agree with them to that extent, but I do think that the Centre should plan education for all the provinces, and because I feel that economic and social planning does not include educational planning specifically, I seek to move my amendment. 1, therefore, suggest that either the word "educational" should be included in this entry, or educational planning should be provided for in a separate entry, whichever may be found convenient by Dr. Ambedkar. I hope Dr. Ambedkar will see our difficulty and tell us whether he does not agree that social and economic planning have got a particular meaning and actually educational planning does not form a major part of it even though it may be a minor part, of it, or whether he considers that under this entry the Union has got power to plan education throughout the country.
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad: Mr. Vice-President, Sir, I rise to support the amendment moved by my sister, Shrimati Purnima Banerjee. It is only in the sphere of higher education that the Centre has been vested with the power of planning. This amendment purports to vest the Government of India with the power of planning in the sphere of education without any restriction or reservation. This power must be vested in the hands of the Centre if our nation is to advance rapidly. It ought to be the duty of the Centre to see that wrong type of education is not instilled in the minds of the young in the primary and secondary stages of education. The impressions of this period of primary and secondary education are not likely to be erased from the minds of the young, whatever we may do in the university stage to wipe out the, impressions of the wrong type of education imparted during the primary and secondary stages of education. There is a real danger that provincial governments imbued with the spirit of provincialism may be tempted to poison the minds of the young. If an all-India outlook is to be developed, educational planning must be placed in the Concurrent List so that the Centre May have the power to plan our education on a sound and secular basis.
Sir, there is another aspect of the question to which I would like to draw the attention of the House. Entry 34 reads thus
"Economic and Social planning."
What about political planning ?
Some Honourable Member: It
will be too disastrous.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It can be done by way of amendment of the Constitution.
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : Let me continue. There is need for political planning as well. Plato in his Republic advocated a rigid system of disciplineand training for philosopher Kings. We must also produce rulers and administrators. There is dearth of leadership in the country. An attempt was made in Nazi Germany to train rulers and administrators on a planned basis. A similar attempt should be made in this country also. Public Service Commission examinations are not enough.
An Honourable Member: Do you want Nazism here ?
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : It is easy to label ideas. Ideas should not be labelled. Labels and Trade marks are meant for Post Offices and Government De
There should be a similar attempt at planning in all the spheres of our political life. Our foreign policy must be planned. I am glad that my honourable Friend, Mr. Keshkar, is present here today. The distant and immediate ,goals must be laid down in clear and explicit terms. There is need for the establishment of an Institute for the study of geopolitics in this country. The whole gamut of our political life must be systematically and scientifically planned. Political planning is as essential as economic and social planning. Every step taken in the political sphere must be on a planned basis.
Shri Rohini Kumar Chaudhuri (Assam: General)* : Sir, it seems to me to be an age since I spoke last. It is not that my tongue does not reach so long, but I loathe to speak in this House lest I impede the progress of the work hem, but today the heart-throbbing speech of my honourable Friend Shrimati Purnima Banerji has aroused me from my slumbers. I come here not to appreciate the speech of my honourable Friend Shrimati Purnima Banerji but to oppose it with all the might that I posses. Sir, we have come nearly to the end of these Lists, I, II and III and what do we find ? What we find is that the position of the States are no longer States or Provinces, but they have been reduced to the position of municipal and other local bodies. All the powers have been taken away either in List I or List No. 3. It reminds me of the words in the Upanishad:
After having taken out everything the same fullness remains : it is as if it is a full Moon; We are taking slices of the full Moon and yet the full Moon still continues as before. That is the position to which we have arrived after going through all these lists. No power is left to the Provinces and the full Moon remains a full Moon as before.
Sir, I would draw the attention of the House to An amendment which was proposed or was tabled-by my honourable Friend, Mr. Santhanam, amendment No. 3668 in which he rightly tries to delete this entry 34 altogether. It would have been much better to hap: dropped this entry 34 altogether. What do you mean by economic and social planning? The economic and social planning of a province or State must be left entirely to the legislature itself. Whenever there is any conflict between List II and III, the legislation which is proposed by the Centre will prevail. In that case by admitting this entry, are you not exposing the State to an interference by legislation passed by the Centre in the ordinary normal working of the State in the matter of social and economic planning? What do you mean by social and economic Planning. All the subjects which have been mentioned in List II in one way or the other lead to economic planning and the result of having economic planning in List II and to have another entry here in order to give jurisdiction to the Centre to
*Translation of Hinustani Speech
not corrected by the Honourable Member.interfere with such economic planning, is I think most unwise. And it is still more unwise on the part of my honourable Friend, Shrimati Purnima Banerji, to limit the powers of the State by adding the word "educational". 'Education' has been
rightly left in the hands of the State. Why should the Centre in any way interefer with educational facilities ? It should in the opinion of the States be given to the provinces. You want to put in "educational facilities" here, but why not put "health facilities" also ? Why do you want to lay strew on education ? If you agree to the amendment moved by Shrimati Purnima Banerji, I ask, why not put health facilities also which is more important than education ? If the object of Shrimati Purnima Banerji is to draw pointed attention of the House to educational facilities,. then why should she not think of health before education ? After all, health is more important than education. Then another Member who is absolutely enamoured of artistic subjects might say that art facilities also might be put in. You can go on increasing one facility after another and take away as far as possible the powers which have been given to the State. That is the object of Shrimati Purnima Banerji and that object should be strongly disapproved of by this House and I would submit if it is possible even at this late stage the House would do well to delete entry 34 altogether.
The Honourable Dr.B.R.Ambedkar : Sir, I am very sorry but I cannot accept this amendment moved by Shrimati Purnima Banerji. The introduction of the word "education" seems to me to be, quite unnecessary. The word " social" is quite big enough to include anything that relates to society as a whole except, of course, religious planning, and a contradiction would be only between 'social' and 'religious'. What the State would not be entitled to plan would be 'religion'; everything else would be open to the State.
With regard to the observations of my honourable Friend Shri Rohini Kumar Chaudhuri, I think he will realize that this entry finds a place in the Concurrent List and the State also would have the freedom to do its own planning in its own way. It is only when the Centre begins to have a plan and if that plan conflicts with the plan prepared by the State that the plan prepared by the State will have to give way and this is in no sense an encroachment upon the planning power of the State and therefore, this entry, I submit,. should stand in the language in which it stands now.
Mr.Vice-President: The question is :
The amendment was negatived.
Mr.Vice-President: The question is:
'That entry 34 stand part of List, Ill."
The motion was adopted.
Entry 34 was added to the Concurrent List.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I move,:
This would be Concurrent.
Mr. Vice-President: The question is.
The motion was adopted.
Entry 34A was added to the Concurrent List.
(At this stage Mr. Vice-President vacated the Chair which was taken by Mr. President.)
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I move:
Mr.President : There is no amendment to this.
The question is :
The amendment was adopted.
Entry 35, as amended was added to the concurrent List.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I move:
(Amendment No. 331 was not moved.)
Mr.President : The question is :
The motion was adopted.
Entry 35A was added to the Concurrent List.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I move:
Mr. President: There is no amendment.The question is:
The amendment was adopted.
Entry 36, as amended, was added to the Concurrent List.
Mr. President: There is a new entry proposed by Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant.
(Amendment No. 144 was not moved.)
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : Sir, I move:
Sir, I bad moved similar amendments on two occasions........
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: This amendment was considered along with other amendments and I gave a reply telling my friend that this matter will be considered by the Drafting Committee. He was then agreeable.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: My only submission is that the wording may be altered as the Drafting Committee may decide but provisionally the entry may be accepted as proposed by me. It should not merely be left to be considered by the Drafting Committee-. Any wording that may be suitable may be put in; but there should be an entry which refers to the protection of children and youth from exploitation and abandonment. I hope Dr. Ambedkar will kindly accept this.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I have told my friend that if I find that the purpose which he has in mind is not covered by any of the other entries, I will do my best to introduce some such entry. I have given him that assurance.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: This is a question to which I and at least some Members of the House attach very considerable importance. It is only a quarter past eleven now and we have got a lot of time. If the learned Doctor would take half an hour, there could even be a recess for half an hour and we can meet again, and he can say definitely whether there is need of such entry or not. We have been discussing various entries. We have an entry for labour welfare. Still we have put in an entry for vocational training for labour. If in this case. Dr. Ambedkar came to the conclusion that in spite of the entry "Labour Welfare" being there, it was necessary specifically to provide for the vocational and technical training, of the same class of persons by an independent entry. I cannot understand why he should resort to far-fetched interpretation so far as children's care is concerned. I hope, Sir, no damage will be done if we have an entry like the one I have proposed in the case of children.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I will give my best consideration to the matter. I am in entire sympathy with its object. What more can I say?
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: I must content myself with this assurance. I hope ultimately an entry to this effect will be introduced.Mr. President: There are certain other amendments. Dr. Deshmukh. No. 252.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: Sir, I move:
"That in List III, the following new entries be added:-
(i) Regulation. control and maintenance of public houses;
'Regulation and control of prostitution and regulation, control and maintenance of public houses."'
Either of these two may be accepted. I do not wish to take the time of the House......
Shri R. K. Sidhva: I might mention, Sir, that even the provincial Governments have the power to do these things.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: I would like to refer to the speech delivered by my honourable Friend Mr. Brajeshwar Prasad where it was pointed out that there was no specific power with the municipalities because the provinces have not enacted any law of this sort. For the sake of uniformity, and also if any State really wants to prohibit or abolish prostitution, that sort of question would not be covered by leaving it only to the interpretation of other entries. Therefore, I would suggest to Dr. Ambedkar to accept this for inclusion. If he does not, I would not like to press this too strongly.
But, the next amendment I want to press as I attach considerable importance to it.
"That in List III, the following new entry be added
'Establishment, and maintenance of National Farms and Parks."'
There is a mis-print here; it should be 'parks' instead of 'farms' where it occurs for the second time. It may be said here also that this is a sort of inherent power which can be utilised under this or that entry. I think we are coming to a stage where we attach more and more importance to nationalisation of various things. There is ample waste land which could be taken over and which could be utilised for co-operative farms, for national farms and parks. National marks are now regarded as a necessity, not only for the sake of providing some healthy place for recreation and for other purposes, but it has several agricultural utilities also. Not only so far as farms are concerned, but parks also where we can teach the general public and the agriculturists how to stop erosion and other things. All these things are necessities in our modern life. If we go to Amercia or other civilised countries, we will find that there are extensive farms not only maintained by the State, but maintained by the Federal Government also and they are looked after., I think a specific mention of this sort would not be in any way harmful and it would be desirable that this entry should be accepted,
Shri Mahavir Tyagi (United Provinces: General) : May I know if the honourable Member by controlling this wants to bring into existence some permit system ?
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: No, Sir.
Shri Mahavir Tyagi: He says control and regulation of prostitution. I have heard of food control and house control by permits. Is it the meaning of this that permits will be issued by the Government ?
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: Yes, Sir. That is the intention. There are licensed public houses where doctors periodically visit, by which alone the evil of venereal diseases can be controlled. This is not a novel thing; this has been donealready in many countries. If prostitution has to be there, it is necessary that it should be under State control. There should be medical examination and there should be licensing of these houses so that the evil does not spread throughout the country and extend to almost every house or to every section of society. By controlling and licensing it is intended not to allow it to expand and spread to others. I think my friend had not had the opportunity of going to France, otherwise he would have been much wiser than lie appears to be.
Shri Mahavir Tyagi: I must congratulate you for your experience
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad: Mr. President, Sir, I feel that the gravity of the situation has not been realised. As one who had to do with books but having no practical experience of France or other countries, I am in a position to say that it is such a vital thing of national concern that the Government of India must do something in this matter if the youth of the country is to be protected from moral abandonment. My Friend Shri Deshmukh spoke in the vein that probably it can be abolished or abrogated
altogether. I do not agree with him on that point. Prostitution is a very old institution-as old as the hills and it cannot be abolished. The roots of this institution lie deep in our human nature. The only thing that we can do is to regulate it. The idea that there should be licenses is a perfectly scientific one and if the youth of the country is to be protected, we cannot depend upon Provincial Governments alone. I had an occasion to table a resolution similar to what Shri Deshmukh has tabled today in this House, while I was a member of the Gaya Municipality in 1938. It was ruled out of order by the President of the Board on the ground that the matter did not lie within the jurisdiction of the Municipality, and that it was a matter which required specific law empowering the Municipality by the Provincial Government.
An Honourable Member: Does the honourable Member suggest that all licenses will be issued from Delhi ?
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad: When we are placing this power in the Concur, rent List, it means the Centre has power to plan, regulate and see that the Provincial Government act accordingly and if the Provincial Governments fail then the Centre steps in. The Provincial Governments have not done much in this direction. Therefore the Centre must take the responsibility on its shoulders.
Shri R. K. Sidhva: Mr. President, I was rather surprised at the attitude of Shri Brajeshwar Prasad. He says this institution is centuries old and it cannot be abolished. Prostitution in India is a disgrace and shame to us and it is regrettable that Shri Brajeshwar Prasad should advocate its continuance. I am sorry that the Provincial Governments, despite the powers that are vested in them, have not yet abolished prostitution. I know in some Provincial Governments; they have enacted acts. If the other provinces have not done, it is their fault. To say that the prostitution should be allowed on licenses is also bad. Licences are issued even today but that is not the point. It is a disgrace and shame to society that this kind of thing should be allowed to continue, I would say that the Provincial Governments must take immediate steps and I support the amendment of Dr. Deshmukh. I, however, say there is no justification for this amendment because the powers are today vested with Provincial Governments; but if Dr. Ambedkar feels there is no power, then certainly I win support it because it is an entry which really goes to improve the morality of a class of people. It is not that that class wants it but under certain circumstances this institution has remained in existence and it is high time that this is abolished and should,not be encouraged. I know some provincial Governments have taken steps and some class of prostitutes have come to Government saying that they had been living on this and have been deprived of their live-lihood. Even today I learnt that in Pakistan the Government are contemplating abolishing prostitution and I know under what conditions and in what places in the heart of the city this trade exists.
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : Probably lie is not aware of the scientific ideas on this subject. If you abolish, the whole thing will go underground.
Shri R. K. Sidhva: My Friend may understand the scientific methods. He is welcome to it. I know what lie talks-about venereal diseases etc. My point is that this thing should be stopped. It is a disgrace and shame. I, therefore, state that if the powers are not complete-if Dr. Ambedkar says that then I support this amendment. Otherwise I know the Provincial Governments do possess this power as I know there are Acts actually enacted in some of the provinces.
Seth Govind Das: (C. P. & Berar: General) : *[Sir, the speech delivered by Shri Brajeshwar Prasad has been to me one of the most surprising events in my life. At a time when we are directing our efforts to raise the moral standard of society and want to create a new social order based on morality, I am surprised to find that there are even now persons amongst us who want to retain the institution of prostitutes.
We, who have worked under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi for the last thirty years, had formed new ideas about the standard of morality and bad expected that under the new Constitution to be framed after independence, we would try to create a new moral order in which such institutions as prostitutes, bars and gambling would become extinct. But I am surprised to find that even today there are persons amongst us who favour the retention of these institutions. I would like to request Dr. Ambedkar to ensure that whatever items we pass here shall be such as are rooted in morality and therefore possess survival value. He should also see to it that the new social order which we are going to create may serve as a model not only to us but to the whole of the world.]
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : On a point of personal explanation.
Mr. President: It is not, necessary. We all understand what you said Everybody has put his own interpretation on that.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: Sir,. . . .
An Honourable Member: Closure.
Mr. President: I have already called Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : One speaker has just now given out that prostitution should be entirely prohibited. With regard to the point of sentiment behind it, not only my humble self but the whole House will agree; but the question is, is it practical and is it desirable ?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Is this a question which we need debate ? The only question is whether there is power-with the State or with the Centre or should it be Concurrent. How the power is to be exercised whether to permit partially or prohibit completely is a matter for each Legislature, which we must leave to the legislature.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: My submission is that it is relevant. The amendment provides for "regulation and control of prostitution." One honourable Member says you must entirely stop prostitution and regulation and control are undesirable. I submit this is neither undesirable nor impracticable. You cannot stop prostitution. You can only regulate and control. You cannot prohibit and if you do it. you close a safety valve for society. The objection is
* Translation of Hindustani Speech.
due to impractical idealism. I suggest that there is nothing inherently or practically wrong in the amendment. That was the reason why I spoke..
Shri V. I. Muniswamy Pillay (Madras: General) : I wish to speak, Sir.
Mr. President: Closure has been moved. The question is
The motion was adopted.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, there is enough power given to the State under these entries to regulate these matters, namely, either for dealing with public houses or having-some large-scale farming. If my Friend, Dr. Deshmukh were to refer to List II, entry 1, which deals with public order, and entry 4 which deals with police and the Concurrent entry which deals with criminal law, he will find that there is more than enough power given to regulate these matters. If he were to refer to entry 24 dealing with land, entry 21 dealing with agriculture in the State List, he will find that there is more than enough power in the States to have State farms or whatever they like.
Therefore, the only question that remains is this, whether this subject relating to the creation of farms and the regulation of public houses should be in the Concurrent List. In my judgment, the criterion to decide whether this matter should be in the Concurrent List or in the State List is whether these matters are of all-India concern or of purely local concern. In my judgment prostitution, the regulation of public houses, and creation of farms are matters of local concern and it is therefore better to leave them to be dealt with by the States. They have got more than enough power for that. I do not know how the Centre can do the job. The Centre has not got any agricultural land. If the Centre wants to establish a farm, the Centre has to acquire the property from the farmers. The
same thin- could be done by the State. I do not see what purpose would be served by having these entries in the Concurrent List; and it must also be remembered that our States which we can States are far bigger than many States in Europe.
Shrimati G. Durgabai: Will Dr. Ambedkar make one point clear ? The entry speaks of regulation or Prohibition of prostitution. I do not understand the meaning of "regulation" here, and I think it should be complete prohibition.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: The States can regulate them and also prohibit them. The States can do it.
Mr. President: Then I put the amendments. The question is:
The amendment was negatived.
Mr. President: Then I put the second new entry-
"(ii) Regulation and control of prostitution and regulation, control and maintenance of public houses." The amendment was negatived.
Mr. President: Then I put the third new entry-
Mr. President: Next is amendment No. 253 of Sardar Hukam Singh.
(Amendments Nos. 253 and 325 were not moved.)These are all the new entries of which I have notice, and so we Complete 'the Third List.
New Entry 88-A
Mr. President: The House will remember that a question of order was raised with regard to an entry, and we had to pass over it, the other day. The question has been raised whether an entry in List I of Schedule VII to the following effect is in order, namely,
It has been argued that this entry, being inconsistent with article 13 which lays down that all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, is out of order. It is argued that the only limitation to this fundamental right is the one laid down in clause (2) of article 13 and the proposed entry not coming under that is out of order. Reliance has been placed in sup,port of this view on a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Alice Lee Grosjean V American Press Company, which laid down that an Act of the Legislature of Louisiana levying a licence tax of 2 per cent. of the gross receipts of revenues obtained by newspapers, magazines and periodical publications having a circulation of more than 20,000 copies per week was invalid ,as violating the Federal Constitution, and abridging the freedom of the press. The question which I have to decide is whether an entry in Schedule VII, List I or for that matter in any of the lists of the nature mentioned above is in order, I am not concerned with the question as to whether a particular legislation based on that entry is ultra vires as violating the rights given in section 13. That will be a matter for courts to decide. The entry proposed only gives the right to the Union Legislature to impose a tax on newspapers including advertisements published therein. Article 13 does not lay down anywhere that newspapers including advertisements published therein shall not be taxed. The entry therefore, appears to be not inconsistent with article 13. Provision for taxation has to be considered independently and on its own Merit apart from the question of the fundamental right to speech and expression. Even the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States on which reliance has been placed does not exclude all taxation. It expressly lays down "It is not intended by anything we have, said to suggest that the owners of newspapers are immune from any of the ordinary forms of taxation for support of the Government. But this is not an ordinary form of tax but one single in kind with a long history of hostile misuse against the freedom of the press". Further the judgment says--"The tax here involved is bad not because it takes money from the pockets of the appellants. If that were all a wholly different question would be presented. It is bad because in the light of its history and of its present
setting, it is seen to be a' deliberate and calculated device in the guise of a tax to limit the circulation of information to which the public is entitled in virtue of the constitutional guarantees". The particular tax was levied on papers having a circulation of more than 20,000 copies per week. There was a competition between such papers and others having a smaller circulation, and the judges held that this discrimination against newspapers having circulation of more than 20,000 operated as restraint in a double sense. First its effect was to curtail the amount of revenue and second its direct tendency was to restrict circulation. It will be a question in any particular case, if it arises to be decided, whether a particular tax operates as a curtailment of the right of freedom of speech and expression and it cannot be laid down that there can be no tax on newspapers or advertisements published therein. The entry as proposed is therefore 'in order.
We shall take up that entry now.Shri Deshbandhu Gupta (Delhi) : Sir, in vew of the fact that the matter is now under the consideration of the Drafting Committee, I request it may taken up later.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I am prepared to accept the amendment moved by the 58 gentlemen.
Shri Mahavir Tyagi: May I inform you, Sir, that a large section of the House would like the-deletion of the entry and so you might kindly agree to hold over the item for further consideration of the Drafting Committee
The Honourable Dr. B. IL Ambedkar: Sir, if the mover of this amendment cares to move it, I am prepared to accept it.
Shri Ramnath Goenka (Madras: General) : Sir, the other day, you requested Dr. Ambedkar to be ready with his alternative proposal'.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: He did not say anything of that kind.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: This item will take some time, Sir.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, the amendment is here.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: What I suggest is that we could got in touch with the Drafting Committee and come to a formula acceptable to all.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: This is a formula which you have proposed.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: We will have the benefit of consultation with you.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Sir, I am prepared to accept entry 88A if they move it.
Shri S. Nagappa: It has been moved.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It has not been moved yet. That was entry 88A in List I-not in the State List. Objection was taken that it was not in order and it was not moved. Therefore, if Mr. Goenka wishes to move. it........
Shri Deshbandhu Gupta: Sir, I formally move that the matter be held over.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Why ? We tried to 'finish the whole list. That is why we hurried up, not allowing many Members to speak to the extent they used to. Now that We have. got a clear-cut amendment signed by many people I do not see why it should be held over.
Shri Deshbandhu Gupta: It is not in a clear-cut form as Dr. Ambedkar himself saw something objectionable in the draft and was prepared to help us with a better draft.
Mr. President: As I understood Dr. Ambedkar the other day, the only question was whether it should be in List I or List II. He said the question of policy had to be decided.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: If you want to put it in List I, I am prepared to accept it I
Mr.President: So far, as the particular place where this entry will go,. that is to be left to the Drafting Committee.
Honourable Dr. B. IL Ambedkar: The whole trouble is this. This entry was originally in List II. Their objection was that it should not be in List II but it should be in this form in List I. I am prepared to accept that if they want it.
Shri V. I. Muniswamy Pillay : Sir, may I move the amendment? I beg to move:"That with reference to amendments Nos. 3582 and 3588 of the List of Amendments after entry 88 of List I, the following new entry be inserted
88A. Taxes on newspapers including advertisements published therein."
I do not think many words are required from me on this amendment since' my honourable Friend Mr. Goenka has made the whole position clear. Sir, I move.
Shri Deshbandhu Gupta.- Sir, on a point of information, may I inquire as to 'That will happen to entry No. 58 in the second List which was held over yesterday ?
Mr. President: It would go.
Shri Deshbandhu Gupta: It was held over yesterday because these two go together.
Mr. President: It was held over because there was an amendment which wanted to transfer this to List II. If it is passed in List I then that amendment will be out of order.
Shri Deshbandhu Gupta: There are two amendments. There is one that this may be transferred to List I and there is another defining the scope of entry 58. The amendment was held over yesterday because this matter was not before the House at that time. They must go together.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I am not bound to accept it. They do not go together. I refuse to accept that.
Mr. President: There was an amendment, No. 122, consideration of which was held over because of this amendment. If the amendment which has been just moved is accepted then in that case amendment No. 122 becomes out of order, and the only proposition before the House will be Dr. Ambedkar's proposition namely amendment No. 121.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: Will there not be a consequential amendment in List II ? In the State List certain powers are given to the State for taxes on sale as well as on advertisement. If this is transferred to List I, then the consequential amendment of which we have given notice....
Mr. President: The notice is that it be included in List I.If it is taken in List I then it goes out.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: But the exception will have to be provided for in List II in the entry; sale of goods excepting newspapers.
Mr. President: It is not necessary.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It is not a consequential amendment at all. Both the amendments are quite independent. One amendment is that the entry should be expanded by the addition of a new entry to be called 88-A. Then there is another amendment which is amendment to my amendment to entry 58 in List II dealing with sales tax. That amendment says that the word"goods" should be so qualified as to exclude newspapers. That will be dealt with on its own merits. The immediate question we have to deal with is whether List I is to be expanded by the addition of entry 88-A in terms as moved here.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: The position is this. We have proposed an entry in List I that taxes on newspapers including advertisements- therein, should be transferred to List I and that the Provinces should not have the authority. to levy any taxes on newspapers. Therefore the amendment No. 57 is a consequential amendment to the amendment No. 122 in entry 58 in List II. Soboth these amendments will have to be taken together. Yesterday when this question of entry 58 in List II came before us, you put it off until you gave a ruling and said a decision could be taken to other on these entries.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Take them one by one. Let both tile amendments be put one after the other.
Shri Ramnath Goenka : May I suggest, Sir. that we put entry 58 in List II first and then 88-A ?
The Honourable Dr. D. R. Ambedkar: You can have it in any way you like, but I want to tell you that voting in a particular manner on the second amendment would be inconsistent with voting on the first in another manner. It will be open to the House to accept the one and reject the other.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: I would like to have your ruling on this matter. If you transfer the taxes on newspapers to List I then it cannot have any place in List II also. If it has a place in List I then it necessarily goes out from.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It will go out of List II only so far as taxes are concerned. But so far as the sale of goods is concerned it would remain. You want to get that out also ? Your object, if I understand, is twofold, namely, that the newspapers should not be liable to any duty and should not be liable to any tax under the Sales Tax Act also. I am not prepared to give you both the advantages, to be quite frank.
Shri Ramnath Goenka : May I request you, Sir, to hold this matter over till Monday morning so that we can put our heads together and come to you, because whatever the interpretation, what is said, is the object of our amendment. If that object is not carried we will have to put in other amendments. But that is our intention. We are only laymen and we will be guided by Dr. Ambedkar. The entire taxation should be taken away from the Provinces to the Centre. If that purpose is not being carried out I am afraid some other amendment will have to be moved which will have the effect of carrying out our intentions. These are our intentions.
Mr. President: Dr. Ambedkar, will you object if the matter is held over ?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: I will be quite frank about it. I have a mandate to accept entry 88A. I am prepared to follow that mandate and accept entry 88A. I have no such mandate with regard to the other thing (amendment No. 122). 1 am sure that it will be difficult to accept it. To have a complete exemption from any kind of taxation on newspapers is to me an impossible proposition.
Shri Ramnath Goenka : It is not so. I want taxation to be left to the Centre and not the Provinces. If I may tell Dr. Ambedkar, the mandate was that it should be taken away from the Provinces.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: You are not to interpret the mandate for me. I know what it is. It is quite clear to me.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: As it is, I am interpreting it to you. (Interruption.)
Shri Deshbandhu Gupta: Since Dr. Ambedkar has referred to the mandate I may make it clear that when this question was taken up with the authority which gave the mandate, it was absolutely clear that the two amendments went together. We wanted this tax to remain a Central tax and not a Central as well as a provincial tax.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It is not right to refer here to matters discussed elsewhere. But, as I said, I am quite prepared to abide by that mandate. The other matter was brought in surreptitiously by our friends afterthey heard what I said in another place as to what a mess they had made by bringing in this amendment.
Shri Ramnath Goenka: As Dr. Ambedkar suggests that we have made a mess we want a way out of the mess.
Mr. President: I find there is much feeling in the matter. So we had better take it up on some other day when the feelings are a bit cooler.
I was asked by some honourable Members in the morning to let them know ,when we are likely to take up the question of language. Yesterday I give the programme up to Friday, the 9th September. And according to the provisional programme which we had made, articles dealing, with Property and' Language were allotted three days, 10th, 12th and 13th. It was only provisional. If Members have no objection to these dates we may stick to them.
Seth Govind Das : Sir, You have said just now that they are provisional dates. May I take it that if on these dates the question of Language is not taken up it will be taken up at least in this session and that people will be informed accordingly of the dates beforehand so that they may be present on those occasions ?
Mr. President: There is no question of the thing not being taken up. It is going to be taken up. Unless the House has any objection, as I said, I have fixed these dates. I said they are provisional only in the sense that I had fixed them and it is open to the House to ask me to fix some other dates. But if the House has no objection, I shall take these,items up on 10th, 12th and 13th.
Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar (Madras: General) : May I ask you to have it on 12th, 13th and 14th instead of on the 10th. 12th and 13th ?
The Honourable Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla, (C. P. & Berar: General) : May I suggest that the discussion of articles 264-A, 265 and 266 be taken up either on the 10th or after the 13th, because most of the members and Premiers who are interested in this are not here and may not be able to come on the 6th when these articles are likely to be taken up. So I suggest that the discussion of these three articles may be taken up after the language question so that everybody will have notice and have time to be present-here.
Mr. President: I have fixed the order of business with reference to the drafts which the Drafting Committee is preparing. The drafts of these particular articles are ready and therefore they have been allotted first. The drafts of the ,other articles are not ready. Then the members will begin to complain that they have not had time after the circulation of the draft proposals to give notice of amendments. As I have already said, this order has been fixed with reference to the drafts which are ready. And I should expect that Members should come back. There is still time. We announced it yesterday.
The Honourable Pandit Ravi Shankar Sbukla: I want to know whether the draft is finally ready for discussion in the House.
Mr. President: I understand it is.
Shri K. M. Munshi (Bombay: General) : The drafts of these articles are ready and I suppose whatever discussions have to be carried on could be finished tomorrow and the matter brought up before the House. It is necessary that we should go on with the scheduled programme day after day. If-we postpone any matter, it will lead to a great deal of difficulty in the future. These drafts are ready : only some Premiers want a revision of one or two provisions whichcould be done tomorrow. There is otherwise no work for Monday. Day after tomorrow there will be no work for the House if these drafts are kept back. We have a few articles left which, unless we go on from day to day, it will be very difficult to finish in time.
Mr. President: We have fixed Fifth and Sixth Schedules. for Monday. I hope they will be finished that day and, if not, we shall go on to the next day.
The Honourable Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla: Unless we have sufficient notice of the programme it will be inconvenient for some of us.
Mr. President: I announced yesterday that this will be taken up on Monday.
The Honourable Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla: We are living in places far away from the Capital.
Mr. President: Now-a-days it is not difficult to reach any place in a few hours' time.
The Honourable Shri Purshottam Dos Tandon (United Provinces: General) Mr. President, in regard to the language question, may I know what dates you propose to fix for discussion ?
Mr. President: I have just announced that we have fixed three days for the discussion of the property question and the language question. The dates arethe 10th, 12th and 13th September.
<strong>The Honourable Shri Purshottam Das Tandon:</strong> May I take it that the language question will be taken up on those days after a decision has been reached on the question of property ?
Mr. President: Yes.
Honourable Shri Purshottam Das Tandon: May I take the liberty of suggesting that you may, as 10th is a Saturday and 11th is Sunday, fix the 12th September for taking up the language question ?
Mr. President: I take it that the language question will really be begun on the 12th, because on the 10th we are going to discuss the property question.
<strong>The Honourable Shri Purshottam Das Tandon:</strong> The language question, instead of being left to chance, may be considered on the 12th that is all I request.
Mr.. President: Nothing will be lost if discussion of the language question is taken up on the date fixed, viz., the 10th. If we finish the property article early on the I 10th, we. shall begin the discussion of the language question. But I do not anticipate that it will end on the 10th. It will be continued till the 12th.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad,: I have one point to suggest. We are proceeding on the assumption that the drafts will be made available to us in time. Up to this time however no draft has been made available. Our programme must therefore be conditional upon the drafts being made available to Members in sufficient time to give notice of amendments. These questions relating to language and property are important and complicated ones.
Mr. President: So far as Monday is concerned, the two draft Schedules for consideration have been circulated.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: Yes. They have been circulated already.Mr. Then, for Tuesday's programme, article 263, etc. in draft form will reach honourable Members today.
Shri Brajeshwar Prasad: The draft of the 6th Schedule has not been distributed to us.
Mr. President: It will be distributed today.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: I was speaking of the draft articles relating to property and language.
Mr. President: I do not know about the draft article on language.
Shri K. M. Munshi: I have already submitted the draft. Notice has been given about it ;and it will be circulated straightway.
Mr. President; We shall circulate it tonight.
Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharathi (Madras: General): Sir, you have allowed only two days for the consideration of the article about language. I may submit that this is a most vital and important question affecting all of us. It is therefore likely that most of us would like to participate in the debate, and two days, in my view, are hardly sufficient. We may require four or five days, for its consideration.
If necessary we shall sit twice on both the days and thus make two into four.
Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharathi: More days are required. That is all my tub-
Mr. President: Everything will depend upon the progress of the discussion.
The House is adjourned till Nine of, the Clock on Monday, the 5th September.
The Assembly then adjourned tiff Nine of the Clock on Monday, the, 5th September, 1949.