788 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
the Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway and its employees and further failure of the Central Government in not extending the order on the award of the said Adjudicator to the employees on the East Indian Railway by making cheap grains available at the rates charged by the North Western Railway as made available to the employees on the Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway”.
What is the exact complaint ? Docs he want that there must be some sort of allowances which have been awarded elsewhere ?
Mr. Ananga Mohan Dam (Surma Valley cum Shillong: NonMuhammadan): Sir, the rule says that both parties to the dispute should apply for a reference to the court. That was done and the privileges that were extended to the employees of the North Western Railway were not extended to the employees of the East Indian Railway as regards the cheap grains that were made available to them.
Mr. President (The Honourable Sir Abdur Rahim) : You want the same privileges to be extended to the employees of the East Indian Railway.
Mr. Ananga Mohan Dam : Yes, Sir.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Labour Member): Sir, I oppose the motion and I must say that my Honourable friend is considerably mis-informed as to the facts and the circumstances. This adjudication took place under Rule 81 A.
Mr. President (The Honourable Sir Abdur Rahim): The only question before the House is whether the motion is in order.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am stating the facts. This adjudication took place under Rule 81A of the Defence of India Rules and the power to appoint an Adjudicator completely vests in the Government of India. Therefore there is nothing unconstitutional in the Government of India appointing an Adjudicator to settle this dispute particularly when the dispute covered a railway which runs in two provinces, namely, the United Provinces and Delhi and no single Provincial Government was entitled to appoint an Adjudicator. Therefore, I submit there is nothing unconstitutional in the action taken.
With regard to the second part, my submission is that my Honourable friend is considerably misinformed on the point because the award of the Adjudicator did not exclude any dispute with regard to the other Railway. It was certainly not open to the Government to extend the provisions of the award to a railway which was not the subject-matter