CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY OF INDIA - VOLUME X


Friday, the 14th October. 1949

Honourable Members : No, no.

Shri H. V. Pataskar (Bombay : General) : I move that the question be now put.

Sudar Hukam Singh : I want to submit to you most respectfully that I do not find anywhere in the Constitution anything that we have secured at so high a price.

Shri Mahavir Tyagi (United Provinces : General) : Sir, may I appeal to you that this general discussion on this important article has not been full. It is for you to see whether you should accept the closure motion or not.

Mr. President : I see that and I am prepared to accept it.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I have nothing to add to what has already been said.

Mr. President : I will now put amendment No. 17 of Shri Guptanath Singh to vote.

Shri Guptanath Singh : I beg leave to withdraw it. The amendment was, by leave of the Assembly, withdrawn.

Mr. President : Then we come to the amendment of Mr. Kamath.

Shri H. V. Kamath : Sir, I leave it to the good sense of the Drafting Committee.

Mr. President : It is a verbal amendment and it can be left to the Drafting Committee. Now I will put amendment No. 256 of Sardar Hukam Singh to vote.

The question 'Is :

"That with reference to amendment No. 23 of List II (Second Week), the following clause be added to article 296 :- (2)Nothing in this article or in article 10 of the Constitution shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any minority community which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State'."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr.President : The question is :

"That with reference to amendment No. 3163 of the List of Amendments, for article 296 the following article be substituted :- '296. Claims of Scheduled castes Scheduled Tribes to services and Posts. The Claims of the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State'."

The amendment was adopted.

Mr. President : The question is :

"That article 296, as amended, stand part of the Constitution."

The motion was adopted. Article 296, as amended, was added to the Constitution.

Article 299.

Shri K. M. Munshi (Bombay : General) : Sir, I move-

"That with reference to amendment No. 63 above, for article 299, the following be substituted :--

'299. Special Officer for Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes, etc.

(1) There shall be a Special Officer for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes to be appointed by the President.

(2) Itshall be the duty of the Special Officer to investigate all matters relating to the safeguards provided for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under this Constitution and report to the President upon the working of those safe guards at such intervals as the President may direct, and the President shall cause all such reports to be laid before each House of Parliament.

(3)In this article, the reference to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be construed as including the reference to such other backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report of a Commission/ appointed under clause (1) of article 301 of this Constitution by order specify and also to the Anglo-Indian community'."

I need not say anything more on this amendment. The Special Officer is intended to look after the political safeguards that have already been given by other articles in the Constitution. I therefore, move the amendment.

Mr. President : I will first take up the, amendments to this particular amendment which has been moved by Mr. Munshi.

(Amendment No. 78 was not moved.)

Shri R. K. Sidhva. : Sir, I move :

"That in amendment No. 64 above, in clause, (3) of the proposed article 299 the words to such other backward classes.

Backward

classes have gone. Mr. Munshi has put it only the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. If this is so, I do not want to move my amendment.

Mr. President : Clause (3) of Mr. Munshi's amendment says-

"In this article, the reference to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be construed as including the reference to such other backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report, etc."

Shri R. K. Sidhva : Then I move my amendment, Sir.

"as the President may on receipt of the report of a Commission appointed under clause (1) of article 301 of this Constitution by order specify and" be deleted.

Sir, I do not want to speak at length because I have touched upon this point in my previous amendment. I know there is the article 301 which specifies backward classes. I am not quite sure that it will be easy for the President to find out who are the backward classes. I do feel that this backward classes article will remain a dead article, because I know that people who will come in the name of the backward classes will come only for their own personal position and personal aggrandisement to insert themselves as backward classes to win their own personal ends I know people would come in the name of the backward classes only to get a few posts, leaving the poor masses of that community in the lurch. I am therefore strongly opposed to the inclusion of the term 'backward classes'. Article 301 says investigate the conditions of socially and educationally backward classes". Now, What does that mean ? 80 per cent. of our people are illiterate. Are they all backward ? Sometimes people who are illiterate have a far better sense of argument than the literate people.

Therefore, Sir, I contend that there is no such class as a backward class. The Britishers wanted to dub many as backward classes and then play them up to the whole world and say that India consists of so many backward classes and so they do not deserve freedom. I do not want this term "backward ,classes" perpetuated in our Constitution. The sooner we do away with this, the better for our country, the 'better for our position in the world. Beyond the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, I do not want any kind of reservation for anybody. If there is any class which feels that their interests have not been justly represented in the services, they should go to the proper authorities and find the remedy. After hearing Sardar Patel, I do not think there will be any injustice to any class people who really deserve some kind of sympathy and justice. If there is any injustice,, then our leaders are there who will look after their interests. With these few words, I commend my amendment for the acceptance of the House.

(Amendments Nos. 80, 258 and 284 were not moved.)

Shri H. V. Kamath : What about amendment No. 65 ?

Mr. President : I was just coming to that. So far we have taken up the amendments to amendment No. 64 moved by Mr. Munshi, which is an amendment to No. 63 which again relates to No. 43. No 43 was sought to be replaced by No. 63, which again is replaced by No. 64. The before I first took up the amendments to amendment No. 64. Now, if any Member is keen on moving any of the other amendments, I will see whether it fits in with No. 64 or not. If it fits in, I will allow that, otherwise not. I will just call the amendment numbers' and if Members wish to move any of their amendments, they can say so.

No. 44, by Mr. Lakshminarayan Sahu and Mr. Chaliha.

Shri Kuladhar Chaliba (Assam : General) : Sir, I move

"that in amendment No. 63, above at the end of clause (2) of the proposed article 299 the words 'for its approval, modification or addition' be added." Mr. President : What amendment are you moving ?

Shri Kuladhar Chaliha : I am moving No. 71.

Mr. President : All right.

Shri Kuladhar Chaliha : Sir, the article merely says that such reports shall be laid before each House of the Parliament. We should positively mention there what the powers of the Parliament are in this regard. As such, these additional words will make

the clause a little clearer than it is. My own experience is that many such reports are laid before the House, but very few people take care either to look into it or give effect to it. Soon order to be more specific, I have added these words. I trust the Drafting Committee and Dr. Ambedkar will see that it is changed. I commend my amendment to the acceptance of the House.

Mr. President : Does any Member wish to move any amendment ? Sardar Bhopindar Singh Man, you wanted to move some amendments.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : Nos. 67 and 69 relate to the amendment that was to be moved by Mr. Munshi, No. 63.

Sir, I move

"That in amendment No. 63 above in clause (1) of the proposed article 299, after the words 'by the President' the words 'and a Special Officer-for minorities for each State for the time being specified in Parts I and II and Part III of the First Schedule who shall be appointed by the Governor or Rajpramukh of the State, as the case may be' be added.

"That in amendment No. 63 above, in clause (2) of the proposed article 299, after fix ,words 'under this Constitution and' the words 'their representation in different legislatures and services of the country' be inserted.'

"That in amendment No. 63 above, at the end of the Explanation to the proposed article 299, the words 'Muslim" Christians, and Sikhs' be added."

My first amendment states that the Minority Officers as originally proposed to be appointed in the States should be permitted to continued I feel that a Minority Officer appointed at the Centre will be at too distant a place to investigate and see the daily working of the Constitution. If Minority Officers are not there, this safeguard contained in article 299 will not be effective. After all, it is the daily life and daily administration and governance that count more than anything. 'I request that Minority Officers in the States should continue and there-should not be merely one officer appointed at the Centre.

My other two amendments state that there should be Minority Officers to investigate, not only the safeguards contained in the Constitution, but also to look into matters pertaining to all minorities and We how they have fared so far as representation in legislatures is concerned or securing of services in the administrative machinery is concerned. There seems to be some confusion about minorities. Certain friends say that because the Minorities Advisory Committee resolved that there will be no political reservations in the legislatures, there will henceforward be no minorities in the country. I takes my breath away how a paper resolution can do away with minorities, and that too, in so short an interval as just a year or so.

The position of this Constituent Assembly, as understand from its previous decisions, is that they agreed that this country has got minorities. They classified these minorities into three groups-Group A, Group B and Group C. Not only that. I hold here another pamphlet published by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. They corroborate the same view and say the basis of these minorities is their religion. They mention the Minorities in the Indian Union as the Muslims, the Sikhs, the Christians, the Parsis and the Anglo-Indians. Now, to argue basically against this contention is to go behind their own words.

A happy sort of atmosphere has been brought about and the minorities henceforward repose their confidence in the good sense of the majority-not that they are wiped out altogether from our country. We march forward in the hope that no injustice will be done, but from that it should not be argued that henceforward the minorities cease to exist. After all, safeguards arc just the instruments of securing the due share of minorities in the governance and administrative machinery of the country. If we are assured that no injustice will be done so far as governance or administrative machinery is concerned, naturally we will not ask for any political safeguards in the Assemblies or else where.

It is a very daring experiment. I wish it

success wholeheartedly. I am quite sure that it will succeed. It should succeed. I shall be very happy indeed if the fears of the minority communities are ultimately proved to be false. But to enable the experiment to succeed, I say that the cases of all the minorities should be reviewed and Minority Officers should be appointed for all the Minorities. After all, you are not giving anything. You are not giving any quota or any share or reserving anything. You only say that these Minority Officers will be reviewing the case of these minorities and scheduled castes. I take your word.

You are taking a great responsibility upon your shoulders. You promise that you will give us no cause for anxiety. Then may I ask Dr. Ambedkar why he feels shy of reviewing the cases of all the minorities ? I am quite sure you will be very just, you will be very fair and that the minorities will get their due share. Then, where is the harm if all these cases are reviewed periodically and brought before the Assembly and the Parliament ? It would give us a constitutional opportunity of reviewing our position. I shudder to think of the alternative, which will be only to raise some sort of agitation and dill it into your ears that an injustice has been done to us. Instead of resorting to certain unconstitutional methods, this provides a constitutional door. I believe there will be no injustice whatever, but that is no reason why these constitutional doors should be closed.

In all earnestness I plead before you-kindly do not abrogate these articles, kindly do not re-open what has already been conceded. I shall be failing in my duty if I do not represent to you that the abrogation of these articles 296 and last of all of 299 will have very widespread and serious repercussions so far as my community is concerned. You are taking away that mental assurance that you have all along given to us. You had said, "Do not worry, there will be somebody all the time observing the working of the Constitution". Now you take that away. You say, "Justice or Injustice, case or no case, your case will not be reviewed." I think it will be injurious to that psychological atmosphere and mental assurance that you had given. I think by taking away this machinery by which the working of the Constitution so far as minorities are concerned will be observed, you are taking away our last hope of securing a hearing and of approaching the Parliament in a constitutional manner and getting our cases periodically reviewed. I believe, Sir, it will not be disfiguring the Constitution, as the popular slogan goes.

In the end I must refer to a certain assurance which is said to have been given by some representatives of my community. It has created a certain impression, and I beg to differ from Sardar Patel and to say that it has created a false impression. Actually, so far as the assurance is concerned, (I do not controvert the facts) I have asked those representatives about the assurance and I have got a copy with me containing the assurance. I have to remove the misunderstanding because it is creating a false impression in my community and elsewhere and hence there is the charge that the Sikhs are going back upon the undertaking they had given. In view of the fact that articles 296 and 299 had been agreed to by the House as recommended by the Advisory Committee, and the draft wording of which has been the same for the last one year and in addition to that they have agreed that Scheduled Castes will be included, the Sikh representatives said that henceforward they were not asking for any further assurances. But having got that assurance, if you now turn back and reopen the case in this House and thereby recede on articles 296 and 299, certainly our pledges cannot be thrown at our face to the effect that we are going back on them Let me read the actual wording of the agreement. If there is anything else that should be in it, let that be produced, so that all this false impression can be removed. It runs :

'We, the Sikh Members of the East Punjab Assembly, beg to refer to there

port of the Sub-Committee of the Minorities Advisory Committee and to say that in so far as this relates to the problems of the Sikh community, the following points should be conceded in addition to the recommendations made in the said report..."

You agreed to certain recommendations made by Minorities Advisory Committee, which are clear and emphatic and so far as the sharing in the services is concerned, it is said that it will be conceded and a specific article-relating to it will be incorporated in the draft Constitution. You also say that a Minority Officer for all the Minority Communities will be appointed. You conceded it and we gave the assurance that we will not be asking any further safeguards in addition to what already had been conceded.

Shri R. K. Sidhva : What order ? What was conceded ?

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : What you conceded and you have not yet abrogated. You conceded it in August 1947.

Shri R. K. Sidhva : There were subsequent developments.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : I shall refer to that too. After this there was another report of the Advisory Committee dated 11th May 1949. If my friend were to read it carefully, not a single reference is there so far as these two resolutions are concerned. So far as the reservation in the Assembly is concerned, that has been taken away. So far as the other decisions, as regards the services and the Minority Officer for reviewing the cases of the minority communities are concerned, they stand and here I request my friend to produce a single sentence or line in the subsequent report submitted by the Advisory Committee and as approved by this House to show that in any case article 2% and article 299 have been abrogated.

Shri R. K. Sidhva : I have been a Member of the Minorities Committee fromthe very inception and I have no recollection of this question having comeup so prominently as my friend relates it now.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : It is not my fault if my friend misses the point. But unfortunately, it is there incorporated in black and white. For me it is a very important point. You ....

Mr. President : What is the document you have been reading from ? You referred to some sort of pledge.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : I was referring to certain assurances which were said to have been given by Sikh Members that henceforward they would not be opening any case and would not be bringing forward any matter or any other safeguards and I say this, in spite of Sardar Patel's speech. As a matter of fact this has gone into the press as if there was some such assurance togive up all the minority rights.

Mr. President : Have you got that document with you ?

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : I have.

Mr. President : Than read it out.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : I have read it.

Mr. President : I did not quite follow. If you read out that whole document to which Sardar Patel was referring...

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : I have this copy with me. If there is any other document, then I stand corrected with regard to what I have read.

Mr. President : I think you had better read it out so that Sardar Patel or anyone else can have a chance of finding out whether this is the document.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : I have said I have no direct knowledge of that document. With regard to the document that those Sikh representatives gave, I have ascertained from them that "this is the document containing the assurances that they gave.

Mr. President : Let us have the document.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : Yes, the document reads as follows:

"We, the Sikh Members of the East Punjab Assembly, beg to refer to the report of' the sub-Committee of the Minorities Advisory Committee and to say that in so far as this relates to the problems of the Sikh community, the following points should be conceded in addition to the recommendations made in the said report :-

1.The Sikh Backward Classes, namely, Mazhbis, Kabirpanthis, Ramdasias, Bawrias, Sareras and Sikligars, should be placed at par with the Scheduled Castes in the matter of

their political rights. This can be done by-

(a)including these classes in the Scheduled Castes enumerated in the Draft Constitution ; or

(b)by abolishing the reservation of seats for all minorities including the Scheduled Castes in East. Punjab ; or

(c)reserving seats for the said Sikh Backward Classes out of the quota of seats reserved for Sikhs. The estimated population strength of these classes among the Sikhs is roughly ten per cent ; these classes would get ten per cent. of the quota of Sikh seats.

2.In the matter of language, script and culture, either zonal arrangement should be provided in the Constitution, or, settled immediately by executive action.

3.Sikh minorities outside East Punjab should receive similar treatment as has been or might be granted to other minorities in the matter of political rights.

Wewould, respectfully suggest that for the elucidation of our case we should be given a hearing before the final decision is taken. We may and that we have no other communal safeguards to ask for so far as provision in the Constitution is concerned and that satisfaction along the lines suggested will go a long way to win over the Sikh masses for the national Cause.

Shri R. K. Sidhva : Who has signed it ?

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : The Sikh members and Sikh representatives signed it. The question is that we have to win over the confidence of the minorities. I do repeat here that it is going back upon certain things which you conceded yourself.

Shri R. K. Sidhva : There is nothing in the, article to say that we are going back.

Mr. President : Let me have a copy of the document. I shall have it ascertained from Sardar Patel whether it is the representatives' document or whether there is any other document and then I shall communicate it to you.

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man : Mr. Sidhva knows perfectly well that in the light of the President's decision today that it is a reopening of the case....

Mr. President : So far as the question of reopening is concerned the case was put on the basis that a decision has already been taken and I said that even if decision has been taken it can be reopened. By reopening I did not mean going back on anything that has been done. Reopening only meant that objection was taken on the ground that a certain decision had been taken and this decision which we are going to take now would be inconsistent with that; and I held that even if it was so, it can be taken up, if 25 per cent. of the Members were in favour of reconsidering the question.

Shri H. V. Kamath : Sir, I move :

"That in amendment No. 63, at the end of clause (2) of the proposed article 299, the words 'for such action as Parliament may deem necessary' be inserted."

It is likely that when the report is presented to the President by the Special Officer appointed under this article, Parliament may consider it necessary or even essential that in view of the advance or the progress regis tered by the Scheduled Castes and Tribes it would be in the best interests of the country to abolish totally the distinction called Scheduled Castes or Tribes and there will be one big unified Hindu community. If this action were to be necessary, it cannot be left to the President alone. It is Parliament which has been invested with power in this Constitution to take the decision. Constitutional safeguards have been guaranteed to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes under this Constitution and it is only Parliament that can take a fundamental decision of this nature. Therefore, I desire that the report presented to Parliament should not be taken up for action by the President but the action taken shall be by the Parliament and not the President.

There is another amendment No. 75 which was in respect of amendment No. 63. But unfortunately that amendment has been substituted by amendment No. 64 just moved by Mr. Munshi. But my amendment would apply in a modified form to this amendment as well. In that amendment (No. 63) with regard to the explanation in that article......

Mr. President : There is no

explanation in amendment No. 63.

Shri H. V. Kamath : Instead of explanation we have got clause (3) in amendment No. 64. That amendment proposes reservation to the Anglo-Indian community as such. A specific reference to the Anglo-Indian Community is, in my humble judgment out of place. We have provided safeguards for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes........

Mr. President : As, a matter of fact I think that the substance of No. 75 has been taken in clause (3). Clause (3) of amendment No. 64 does not include the Anglo-Indian community now.

Shri It. V. Kamath : It does, Sir. The last words are "the Anglo-Indian community" and I want that to be deleted.

Mr. President : Yes, I see.

Shri H. V. Kamath : The reference to Scheduled Castes and Tribes is construed as meaning also such backward classes as the President may by order specify after receiving the report of the Commission. The Anglo-Indian community is neither a backward class nor a Scheduled Caste. I do not know how it can be Jumped together with these two classes- Scheduled Castes and backward communities. The only safeguard that will be provided to the Anglo-Indian community is representation in the House of the People and State Legislatures through nomination, in case the President or the Governor thinks that that community is not adequately represented in those legislatures, and that too for a period of ten years, After that the safeguard automatically lapses.

As regards the safeguard given to the Anglo-Indian community regarding reservation in the services, the Anglo-Indian community, not being a backward community at all, is even today, over-represented in some services, far in excess of its proportion to the population. Therefore I feel that in this clause (3) reference to the Anglo-Indian community is absolutely unnecessary. The Anglo-Indian community is not at all a religious community: it is at best, or at worst, a racial community and it has a racial basis. I think we should not give encouragement to racial communities in this country. If at all they want to join any minority they should join the Christian community in India. They have no right to exist as a separate Anglo-Indian community. I hope that necessary changes will be made in clause (3) of' this article.

Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : Sir, I move :

"That in amendment No. 63 of List II (Second Week), for the proposed article 299. the following be substituted :-

'299. (1) There shall be special officer for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes to be appointed by the President.

(2)The special office in consultation with the President may appoint a special officer ,for each State who shall work exclusively under his superintendence, direction and control.

(3)The special officer appointed either for the Union or for a State shall not be a member either of the Scheduled Tribes, the Scheduled Castes or of such other backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report of a commission appointed under clause (1) of Article 301 of this Constitution by order specify.

(4)The salaries, allowances and Pensions payable to the special officer for the Union and to the special officer for each State shall be expenditure charged on the revenues of India.

(5) Itshall be the duty of the special officer for the Union to make annual recommendations as to the steps that should be taken by the Union and by each State to improve the economic, educational and cultural level of the Scheduled Tribes, the Scheduled Castes or of such other backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report of a commission appointed under clause (1) of Article 301 of this Constitution by order specify and as to the sums that should be separately allotted in the annual budget of the Union Government and of each State Government for the purpose; and the President shall cause all such recommendations to be laid before Parliament.

(6)Parliament shall have the power to reject or accept in whole or in parts any of tile recommendations contained in the Report.

(7)All State

Governments shall be bound to make annual allotment in their budgets of such sums as Parliament may doom to be necessary for the purpose of giving effect to the recommendations contained in the Report of the special Officer for the Union.

(8)Until the appointment of the commission and consideration of its Report by the President under clause (1) of Article 301 of the Constitution the backward classes shall consist of such castes and communities as may be determined by the President.

(9)The President may delegate the power to the special officer for the Union to supervise and give effect to all or any recommendations made by the commission appointed under Article 301 and accepted by the President.

(10) Allappointments to be made under clauses (1) and (2) of this Article shall be made from the following category of persons (a) Doctors (b)Scientists (c)Sociologists and (d)Anthropologists

(11)Parliament shall have the power to repeal or amend any or all of the Provisions of this Article.

Sardar Hukam Shigh : Sir, I move....

Shri R. K. Sidhva : Sir, this amendment was lost on a previous occasion. The inclusion of Christians, Sikhs and Parsees has been turned down.

Mr. President : This amendment relates to article 299. How could it have been lost, as article 299 has not been considered at all ? A similar amendment has been lost with reference to article 2% and not299.

Shri R. K. Sidhva : Here the Christians, the Sikhs and Parsees are mentioned. The principle has been rejected by the House in a previous article.

Sardar Hukam Singh : Mr. President, Sir, I beg to move :- "That in amendment No. 63 above, in the explanation to clause (2) of the proposed article 299, after the word 'means' the words 'the Muslims, the Christians, the Sikhs, the pareeses the Anglo-Indians' be inserted."

Sir, I would not go over the ground that has already been covered......

Shri K. M. Munshi : May I rise to point of Order'? The words of my amendment No. 64 only refer to "all matters relating to the safeguards", that is only where safeguards are provided by the Constitution. No safeguards have been provided for the Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Parsees. The only safeguards in the Constitution so far accepted are with regard to Anglo-Indians and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Therefore, Sir, my submission is that there are no safeguards for the other communities and this amendment is out of order.

Sardar Hukam Singh Under the Constitution there are safeguards.

Shri K. M. Munshi :There are no safeguards for these communities.

Sardar Hukam Singh Under article 23 there are safeguards for minorities. Thatis also included in the Constitution.

Shri K. M. Munshi :Article 23 is fundamental, cultural right for which thesafeguard is the Supreme Court and not the Special Officer.

Mr. President : The Special Officer may be called upon to report as to how that has worked. You can go to the Federal Court or to the Supreme Court and get its decision whether a particular article of the Constitution has been broken, but then the officer may also report whether a particular article in the Constitution has been given effect to and so. that is what Sardar Hukam Singh wants.

Shri K. M. Munshi : Sir, that is not a safeguard. It is not, with great respect, a safeguard. 'Safeguard' means a political safeguard for a community which has been provided, but fundamental right belongs to every citizen and if Ms right is infringed' the only remedy that he has is to go to the Supreme Court. Supposing an officer is invested with the power to investigate into it, it has no value.

Mr. President : It has a certain value for administration purposes and the ,Government can take note of the report of an officer that a particular right which has been conferred is not being observed or is not being respected. The Administration can take note of that and can deal with that.

Sardar Hukam Singh : If the violation is not taken to the Federal Court, then, would it not be the duty of the Government to see whether the minorities are

being fairly treated or not or whether they are getting the justice or not ?

I am not afraid of the answer. I cannot go over the ground already covered and I would submit only one or two things. Even if my request and my amendment under 296 has been rejected, then it is all the more necessary that under 299 the Special Officer should be invested with the powers and authority to go into details of the safeguards and rights of all minorities and it should not be restricted to these Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes alone. We have been told here that we should trust our leaders and we should trust the future. This is all right and everything conceded. Granting that everybody is honest the Government wants to do justice to every community, what then unless the Government know whether anything amiss has been done, whether any unfair treatment has been meted out, whether any pledges have been violated or whether fair treatment is being meted out to everybody ? Unless the Government has some source of knowing it, how will it be in a position to redress the wrongs ? Therefore, my submission is that even if it was considered that it was not necessary to include these minorities and to specify them under 296, it is very essential that the officer if he is to be appointed ought to go into these things to find out and report on the working of the Constitution so far as all the minorities are concerned, and it should not be restricted to one or two- classes only.

I take this opportunity of answering one thing that has already been said I put a question, but that has nor been answered. I request the Honourable Mr. Munshi to answer that. I was told by the Honourable Sardar that if the Sikhs are sorry, then they can return what they have got and they can have the safeguards if they want. That was my complaint. I should like to know what they have got.. We are told that four. backward classes have been included. Where are they included in any Schedule ? That is, what I want to know. There was a schedule and we had to sacrifice everything for getting those four backward classes included in that Schedule. This Schedule is absolutely gone now. Under article 300-A, it is left to the President to consult the Governor and then to specify who would be the Scheduled Castes. I have paid the price, as I am told I have sacrificed everything that I had, but I have got nothing in the Constitution. This is my complaint and that shall be answered.

(Amendment No. 80 was not moved.)

Mr. President : These are all the amendments we have got. Does any Member wish to say anything ?

Honourable Members : No, Sir.

Shri K. M. Munshi : Sir, I have very few words to say in reply. As regards the amendment of my honourable Friend, Mr. Chaliha, he will see that the Special Officer's report is a kind of expert's report which comes Wore the, Parliament. The Parliament certainly will gave a right to discuss it. Any member can raise a debate on it, but surely a report of an expert, who has collected facts, cannot be modified or added to by a legislature. It only contains the materials placed before the Parliament for its decision and therefore, I submit, Sir, that amendment No. 71 is really inappropriate.

With regard to amendment No. 80 of honourable Mr. Kamath, I am really surprised that he wants the deletion of the words "and also to the Anglo-Indian community". By sections 297 and 298 the Constitution has given specific safeguards to the Anglo-Indian community and the whole object of this article 299 is to see that the working of such of the political safeguards given to some of the communities as have been accepted by the Constitution should be properly investigated into and placed before the Parliament. If the Anglo-Indian community has certain safeguards, then it is the function of this officer to scrutinize their working.

Then as regards amendment No. 74 where the honourable Sardar Hukam Singh wants to introduce the Muslims, the Christians, the Sikhs and the Parsaes in addition to Anglo-Indians, I am of opinion, Sir, with great respect

that the safeguards contemplated by article 299 are not fundamental rights which are attached to very citizen. They are only 'safeguards', safeguards meaning political safeguards for the protection of certain well defined sections of the citizens. Otherwise, it would involve the special officer going into the working of all the fundamental rights given by the Constitution. So far as I understand my amendment, it only means that the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, the Anglo-Indian community and the backward classes who are under the fundamental right article 10, given specific safeguards, and the officer should examine whether they have been properly worked or not. That being this thing, it is rot possible for me to accept the words "Muslims, Christians, Sikhs" etc. mentioned in amendment No. 74.

Sir, I have only one word more to say with regard to Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man's amendment No. 67.

Shri H. V. Kamath : What about amendment 72 ?

Ski K. M. Munshi : As regards amendment No. 72, it is not necessary to put in the words suggested, viz., "for such action as Parliament may deem necessary". Once the report is before the Parliament, as I stated already, a debate can be raised on it and a resolution can be moved. It is implied; it is not necessary to add these words-

Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man by his amendment No. 67, wants that there should be a special officer in each State. Well, if the special officer envisaged in this article requires assistance of other officers, they will be appointed. But there is no need for appointing a separate officer for each State. That would only complicate matters. The object is to see whether the whole thing is worked on one principle throughout the country. We do not want separate officers in each State as permanent guardians. The honourable the Mover of the amendment has also introduced the word 'minorities' in it. We have removed the word 'minorities' from Article 296 and it is entirely inappropriate in 299. In passing, he tried to reply to what Sardar Patel had already said on the safeguards for Sikhs. I do not want to repeat what Sardar Patel said. I shall deal with only one point to which he referred and which I think I should refer. I was a member of the Committee appointed for the purpose of looking into the Sikh question. From the beginning of the, Advisory Committee and the Minorities Committee, I had something or other to do with all the stages of the negotiations. I can assure the House that at the time when the Advisory Committee met on the last occasion, there was no question of providing safeguards for any religious minority. The negotiations proceeded on the footing that except the backward classes who are economically and socially backward, and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes who have a special claim of their own. no other minority should be recognised in the Constitution. The honourable Member read some statements made by certain Sikhs. Unfortunately, in the short time. at my disposal. I have not been able to reclaim the different documents; but of one thing I can assure the House. When the ,matter came up before the Advisory Committee, the Sikh members withdrew every sort of claim for any safeguards whatever in consideration of the Sikh scheduled classes being placed among the Scheduled Castes and given the privileges, which the latter were entitled to. Any cry raised now that they did not do so is an after- thought.

I do not want to say anything more about it and the kind of allegations which 'have been made are entirely unwarranted. Even with regard to the Muslim community, the debate centered round the quest-,on of representation. But it was understood that even so far as they were concerned also, the claims as regards service were given up. They were not expressly mentioned in the report. The basis of that decision was that We should not recognize in the Constitution any religious minority of this nature. That was the basis. I :Submit it is too late to go back upon this.

Sardar Hukam Singh : My question has not been answered. Have these four

Sikh classes been included in the Scheduled Castes ?

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Of course, they will be.

Shri K. M. Munshi : The President is empowered to issue, under article 300-A, a list of Scheduled Castes. In that. these Scheduled Castes will find a place.

Sardar Hukam Singh : Where is the guarantee that the President will include these people in that list ? We have given up all safeguards to secure this in the Constitution. That has not been done.

Shri K. M. Munshi : The President has that power. The President is sure to keep to the pledge which has been given. This decision finds a place in the Advisory Committee's Report that the Sikh Scheduled Castes will form part of the Scheduled Castes and provided with the safeguards under article 296 which we have already passed. There is no question of going back upon that pledge, you may take it from me. I repeat the Sikh Scheduled Castes will be included in the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Punjab..

Mr. President: I will now put the amendments to-vote, one by one. Although these amendments have been moved with reference to amendment No. 63, they would fit in with amendment No. 64 and therefore they have been allowed to be moved. If any one is accepted, we shall put it in the right place.

The question is

"That in amendment No. 63 above, in clause (1) of the proposed article 299, after the words 'by the President' the words 'and a special Officer for minorities for each State for the time being specified in Parts I and II and Part III of the First Schedule who shall be appointed by the Governor or Rajpramukh of the State, as the case may be be added."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President : The question is :

"That in amendment No. 63, above, in clause (2) of the proposed article 299, after the words under this constitution and' the words 'their representation in different legislatures and services of the country, be inserted."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President : The question is :

"That in amendment No. 63 above, at the end of clause (2) of the proposal article 299, the words 'for its approval, modification or addition' be added."

The amendment was negatived.

President : The question is : "That in amendment No. 63 above, at the end of clause (2) of the proposed article 299, the words 'for such action as Parliament may deem necessary' be inserted."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President : The question is :

"That in amendment No. 63 above, in the Explanation to clause (2) of the proposed article 299, after the word 'means the words 'the Muslim, the Christians, the Sikhs, the Parsees, the Anglo-Indians; be inserted."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President : The question is

"That in amendment No. 63 above, in the Explanation to the proposed article 299, for the words 'and includes the Anglo- Indian community' the words 'and includes such community or communities as the President may then specify' be substituted."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President : The question is "That in amendment No. 63 above, at the end of the Explanation to the proposed article 299, the words 'Muslim, Christians, and Sikhs' be added."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President : The question is :

"That in amendment No. 64 above, in clause (3) of the proposed article 299, the words 'to such other backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report of a Commission appointed under clause (1) of article 301 of this Constitution by order specify and' be deleted."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President: Amendment No. 80. It was not moved by Mr. Munavalli. I think it is covered by the other amendment. I had better put it to vote.

The question is :

"That in amendment No. 64 above, in clause (3) of the proposed article 299, the words and also to the Anglo-Indian community' be deleted."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President : The question is :

"That in amendment No. 63 of List II (Second Week), for the proposed article 299, the following

be substituted :-

'299. (1) There shall be a special officer for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes to be appointed by the President.

(2)The special officer in consultation with the President may appoint a special officer for each State who shall work exclusively under his superintendence, direction and control.

(3)The special officer appointed either for the Union or for a State shall not be a member either of the Scheduled Tribes, the Scheduled Castes or of such other backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report of a commission appointed under clause (1) of Article 301 of this Constitution by order specify. (

4)The salaries, allowances and pensions payable to the special officer for the Union and to the special officer for each State shall be expenditure charged on the revenues of India.

(5) Itshall be the duty of the special officer for the Union to make annual rocommendations as to the steps that should be taken by the Union and by each State to improve the economic, educational and cultural level of the Scheduled Tribes, the Scheduled Castes or of such other backward classes as the President way on receipt of the report of a commission appointed tinder clause (1) of Article 301 of this Constitution by order specify and as to the sums that should be Separately allotted in the annual budget of the Union Government and of each State Government for he purpose; and the President shall cause all such recommendations to be laid before Parliament.

(6)Parliament shall have the power to reject or accept in whole or in parts any of the recommendations contained in the Report.

(7) All State Governments shall be bound to make annual allotment in their budgets Of such sums as Parliament may deem to be necessary for the purpose of giving effect to the recommendations contained in the Report of the special officer for the Union.

(8)Until the appointment of the commission and consideration of its Report by the President under clause (1) of Article 301 of the Constitution the backward classes shall consist of such castes and communities as may be determined by the President.

(9)The President may delegate the power to the special officer for the Union to supervise and give effect to all or any recommendations made by the commission appointed under Article 301 and accepted by the President.

(10) Allappointments to be made under clauses (1) and (2) of this Article shall be made from the following category of persons

(a) Doctors

(b)Scientists

(c)Sociologists and

(d)Anthropologists

(11)Parliament shall have the power to repeal or amend any or all of the provisions of this Article.',

The amendment was negatived. Mr. President : I think these are all the amendments. I put article 299, (amendment No. 64), as moved by Mr. Munshi.

The question is :

"That with reference to amendment No 63 above, for article 299, the following be substituted :-

'299. Special Officer for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes etc.

(1) There shall be a Special Officer for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes to be appointed by the President.

(2) Itshall be the duty of the Special Officer to investigate all matters relating to the safeguards provided for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under this Constitution and report to the President upon the working of those safeguard, at such intervals as the President may direct, and the President shall cause all such reports to be laid before each House of Parliament.

(3) Inthis article, the reference to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be construed as including the reference to such other backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report of a Commission appointed under clause (1)of article 301 of this Constitution by order specify and also to the Anglo-Indian community'."

The motion was adopted.

Article 299, as amended, was added to the Constitution.

Mr. President : We shall adjourn now. We sit again at four o'clock

The Assembly then adjourned for Lunch till Four

of the Clock.

The Assembly met after Lunch at Four of the Clock. Mr. President (The Honourable Dr. Rajendra Prasad) in the Chair.

STATEMENT RE: REPORT OF MINORITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

Mr. President: Before we take up the other articles which are on the Order paper today I desire to make one statement. When articles 296 and 299 were under discussion this morning, the Honourable Sardar Patel referred to a written document. One honourable Member, Sardar Bhopinder Singh Man, read out portions of a document which he thought was the document to which reference was being made by the Honourable Sardar Patel. As I had some doubts, I thought it would not be right to let only a part of the document go on the record and I requested the honourable Member to read out the whole of the document which he had in his hand which he kindly did. Since then I have made enquiries and I find that that is not the document to which the Honourable Sardar Patel referred in his speech. I desire to read out the document which Sardar Pat, I had in mind so that the other document having gone on record, this might also go on record and any understanding which might have been created on account of that document may be-chared.

Sardar Sochet Singh (Patiala & East Punjab States Union) : Is it possible to circulate copies of this Document ?

Mr. President : Of course, but I shall read it now. This document is dated the 10th May 1949. The Advisory Committee meeting was held on the 11th May and evidently the decision that was taken in the Advisory Committee was in pursuance of this document. It is signed by three. Members, the honour able Sardar Ujjal Singh, the honourable Sardar Jogindar Singh Mann and Sardar Gurbachan Singh Bajwa. I will now read out the whole document.

"A meeting of the Sikh Members of the East Punjab Legislative Asssembly and of the Constituent Assembly was held in Delhi on the 10th May. The following attended:-

1.Sardar Kapoor Singh

2.Gyani Kartar Singh

3.Sardar Swaran Singh

4.Sardar Ishar Singh Majhail

5.Sardar Ujjal Singh

6.Sardar Joginder Singh Mann

7.Bhai Piara Singh

8.Sardar Inder Singh

9.Sardar Gurbachan Singh Bajwa

10.Sardar Dalip Singh Kang

11.Sardar Ajit Singh

12.Sardar Shiv Saran Singh

13.Sardar Narottam Singh

14.Sant Narinder Singh

15.Sardar Hukam Singh

16.Sardar Tara Singh

17.Sardar Rattan Singh Moga

18.Sardar Rattan Singh Logarh

19.Sardar Gurbachan Singh, Ferozepore

20.Sardar Sajan Singh Mirjandpuri

21.Sardar Jagjit Singh Mann

22.Sardar Sardul Singh.

Sardar Kapoor Singh, Speaker, East Punjab Legislative Assembly, presided. The following proposals were unanimously adopted in regard to the safeguards for Sikh Minorities to be provided in the Constitution. These proposals have also the support of almost all the Members who could not be present at the meeting.

1.The Sikh Backward Classes, viz., Mazhabis, Kabirpanthis,Ramdasias, Baurias,Sikligars etc. should be given the same privileges in regard to representation in the Legislatures and other Political concessions in the East Punjab and PEPSU as may be provided for the Scheduled Castes. For this purpose, either these Classes may be included in the Scheduled Of Scheduled Castes enumerated in the Draft Constitution or seats may be reserved for them on population basis out of the quota reserved for Sikhs.

2.In the East Punjab, seats should be reserved for Sikhs according to their population with right to contest additional seats.

3.In Provinces other than the East Punjab and the Centre, the Sikh Minorities where they are entitled to representation on the strength of their numbers should have seats reserved for them and when adequate numbers are not returned by election, their strength should he made good by nomination.

4.The Sikhs will be prepared to give up reservation in the East Punjab if Sikh and Hindu Scheduled Castes are lumped together and seats reserved for them on the strength of their population.

In case these proposals are not accepted, the whole

question of safeguards for Sikh Minorities may be referred to arbitration in accordance with the assurances given by the Congress. (Sd.) Ujjal Singh

(Sd.) Joginder Singh Mann

(Sd.) Gurbachan Singh Bajwa,

Dated the 10th May 1949.

I do not desire to make any comment. If both the documents are read together, Members will be able to draw their own inferences.

Article 48

Mr. President : We shalt now take up the various articles which are mentioned in the Order paper today beginning with article 48. These are all in the nature of amendments to articles which have already been accepted. Wherever necessary, I suppose the formal permission of the House will be taken altering the decisions previously taken. Article 48.

Shri T. T. Krisnamachari (Madras : General) : Mr. President, Sir, from Article 48 till practically the end of article 303 of the First Schedule, all of them, excepting 273A and 302AA. require reopening of articles that have been passed already and I therefore submit that the permission of the House for reopening these articles might be taken, if the Chair so wishes.

Mr. President : The question is:

"That the House give leave for reopening these decisions

The motion was adopted.

Shri T. T. Krishnamachari : Mr. President, I move-

"That in clause (3) of article 48, for the words 'The President shall have an official residence' the words 'The President shalt be entitled without payment of rent to the use of his official residences' be substituted."

Sir, I see that my Friend Mt-. Sidhva has an amendment to my amendment. Bet I would invite his attention to the amendment this House his accepted yesterday in respect of Part VIA-the amendment moved by any friend the Honourable Santhanam-which reads like this :

"Unless he has his own residence in the capital of his State, the Rajpramukh shall be entitled to the use of an official residence without payment of rent, and there shall be paid to the Rajpramukh such allowances..etc."

Subsequently the article relating to the Governors had to be brought into line with this provision. This was accepted by the House yesterday. That is my reason for bringing forward this amendment. I do hope Mr. Sidhva will not, therefore, press has amendment, in view of the fact that we are merely following the line indicated by the House in accepting the Honourable Mr. Santhanam's amendment of yesterday, in respect of Part VIA.

Shri R. K. Sidhra : Sir, the Honourable Shri Santhanam's amendment related to Rajpramukhs; but my amendment says that as far as the President is concerned he will be entitled to use the Government House as his official residence without any rent. So I do not know how Mr. Santhanam's amendment will meet this purpose.

Shri T. T. Krishnamachari : I would ask my Friend Mr. Sidhva to read the amendment once again. It says-

"The President shall be entitled without payment of rent to the use of his official residences."

Actually Mr. Sidhva has missed the point. The words used are "official residences." The President may have more than one official residence. The Governor-General has a residence in Delhi and another in Simla. Therefore, these words are used and the expert-advice is that this will fill in the bill completely, and so I feel no change is required. I would therefore, request Mr. Sidhva not to press his amendment.

Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena (United Provinces: General): Sir, Mr. Sidhva wants to say that the Government House will be used only for the residence of the President. But the future Parliament may like to put it to some other use also.

Shri R. K. Sidhva : I thought I need not press my amendment, but from what Prof. Shibban Lal has said. I feel that I must press it. He suggested that the Government House may be utilised for some other purpose. It may be utilised by a wandering Sanyasi as Prof. Shibban Lal desires. I do not want any doubt to be left, and so I want the words "Government House" to be specifically mentioned, as I have done in my amendment. It may be utilised for other purposes also, as we have

used it for the exhibition. But it should be laid down that the Government House should be utilised for the residence of the President.

Mr. President : But Government House is not excluded for the residence of the President, by Mr. Krishnamachari's amendment. Need we have any discussion about this matter?

Shri H. V. Kamath : Mr. President, Sir, the other day I opposed the pro-vision regarding residences without payment of rent for Supreme Court Judges, but Dr. Ambedkar in reply pointed out that articles already passed by this House have provided residences for the Governors and the President without payment of rent, and his answer to me was that at that time I did not object to the provision of residences to the' Governors and President without payment of rent. Now it seems some doubt has arisen in his mind whether those earlier articles would be open to any other interpretation, that they may be interpreted as meaning residence on payment of rent, and not without payment of rent. His argument the other day was that as regards judges, those who come from places far off from the capital should not be put to the trouble of searching for houses in Delhi. That was the point that he made out the other day. On the same argument, I would suggest to him that it would not be improper or unwise to provide the Ministers also with residences without payment of rent. After all, when you provide the supreme judiciary with rent-free residences, and the Executive Head also a similar rent-free residence, I think it would be a wise and reasonable course to provide these other dignitaries with like residence--I mean the Ministers as well. I hope the House will agree with me that there must be this constitutional provision.

Mr. President : That question does not arise in connection with the amendment before the House.

Shri H. V. Kamath : Dr. Ambedkar was quite clear when he gave his answer to me the other day, but now he seems to have dome doubt in his own mind, and he has come now with an amendment seeking to provide residences to Governors and the President, without payment of rent. We should, proceeding logically, provide rent-free accommodation to Ministers also.

The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, if I may say a word. This amendment is merely consequential or analogous to the provision we have made with regard to the Rajpramukhs. In the clauses that were moved the other day with regard to the residences of Rajpramukhs, we have definitely stated that they will be rent-free. On comparing the similar clauses relating to the Governors, we found that somehow there was a slip and we did not mention rent-free houses. It is to make good that lacuna, and to bring the cases of the Governors and the President on the same footing as the Rajpramukhs that this amendment is needed.

With regard to the question of Ministers, that will be regulated by law made by Parliament. Whether Parliament will be prepared to give them salary with house, and if with house, whether it will be free of rent or with rent, are all matters that will be regulated by Parliament, because the offices of Ministers are political offices dependent upon the goodwill and the confidence of the House, and it seems to me that Mr. Kamath will very easily understand that it would be riot proper to remove the Ministers from the purview and jurisdiction of Parliament.

Mr. President: I would like to put it to vote.

The question is:

"That in clause (3) of article 48, for the Words 'The President shall have an official residence, the words 'The President shall be entitled to the use of the Government House ,without payment of rent' be substituted."

The amendment was negatived.

Mr. President: Then I put the amendment moved by Shri T. T. Krishnamachari.

The question is:

"That in clause (3) of article 48, for the words 'The President shall have an official residence' the words 'The President shall be entitled without payment of rent to the use of his official residences' be substituted."

The amendment was adopted.

Shri T. T. Krishnamachari :

Sir, I move amendment No. 360.

"That clause (5a) of article 62 be omitted:'

The reason for this is, as I told the House the other day on behalf of Dr. Ambedkar, that we do not propose to move Schedule IIIA and also the Schedule which deals with Instructions to Governors. The clause in question reads thus: "(5a) In the choice of his ministers and in the exercise of his other functions under this constitution, the President shall be generally guided by Instructions set out in Schedule IIIA." Actually, since Schedule IIIA is not moved, this clause becomes superfluous. Therefore I have moved for its omission.

Shri H. V. Kamath: Sir, you might remember that some months ago you raised the important point whether the President would always be bound to accept the advice of his Council of Ministers. Our Constitution is silent on that point. It only says that there shall be a Council of Ministers to aid and advise the President. Dr. Ambedkar at that time undertook to insert some provision somewhere in the Constitution in order to make this point clear.

That is my recollection. The President will kindly say whether I am right or wrong. Nowhere in the Draft Constitution has this point been clarified I hope Dr. Ambedkar will do so, and not leave it vague as at present.

The Honourable Dr. B.R. Ambedkar : Sir, I wish I had notice of this, so that I could give the necessary quotations. But I can make a general statement The point whether there is anything contained in the Constitution which would compel the President to accept _the advice of the Ministry is really a very small one as compared with the general question.' I propose to say something about the general question.

Every Constitution, so far as it relates to what we call parliament democracy, requires three different organs of the State, the executive, the judiciary and the legislature. I have not anywhere found in any Constitution a pro vision saying that the executive shall obey the legislature, nor have I found anywhere in any Constitution a provision that the executive shall obey the judiciary. Nowhere is such a provision to be found. That is because it is generally understood that the provisions of the Constitution are binding upon the different organs of the State. Consequently, it is to be presumed that those who work the Constitution, those who compose the Legislature and those who compose the executive and the judiciary know their functions, their limitations and their duties. It is therefore to be expected that if the executive is honest in working the Constitution, then the executive is bound to obey the Legislature without any kind of compulsory obligation laid down in the Constitution.

Similarly. if the executive is honest in working the Constitution, it must act in accordance with the judicial decisions given by the Supreme Court. Therefore my submission is that this is a matter of one organ of the State acting within its own limitations and obeying the supremacy of the other organs of the State. In so far as the Constitution gives a supremacy to that is a matter of constitutional obligation which is implicit in the Constitution itself.

I remember, Sir, that you raised this question and I looked it up and I had with me two decisions of the King's Bench Division which I wanted one day to bring here and refer in the House so as to make the point quite clear. But I am sorry I had no notice today of this point being raised. But this is the answer to the question that has been raised.