DRAFT CONSTITUTION 1073
to the Bill in the Dominion Legislature or in the Legislature of the Province or Indian State had been taken in Parliament or the Legislature of the corresponding State.
312H. The provisions of this Constitution relating to the Consolidated Fund of India or of any State and appropriation of moneys Transactions out of such fund shall not apply in relation to moneys occuring between the commencement of the received or raised or expenditure incurred by the Constitution and the Government of india or the Government of any State
31st of March, 1950. between the commencement of this Constitution and the thirty-first day of March, 1950, both days inclusive, and any expenditure incurred during that period shall be deemed to be duly authorised if the expenditure was specified in a scheduled in a schedule of authorised expenditure athenticated in accordance with the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, by the Governor-General of the Dominion of India or the Governor of the correspoding Province or is authorised by the Rajprmukh of the State in accordence with such rules as were applicable to the authorisation of expenditure from the revenues of the corresponding Indian State immediately before such commencement”
I do not think there is anything necessary to say by way of explanation of these articles.
There are two amendments Nos. 18 and 19 on the Notice Paper proposing to omit the word ‘provisional’ in articles 312A and 312B. I propose to accept these amendments in consonance with what we have already done.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : Mr. President, I move :
“That in amendment No. 16 above, in the proposed new article 312B, the word ‘provisional’, wherever it occures, be deleted.”
“That in amendment No. 16 above, in the proposed new article 312A, the word ‘provisional’ where it occurs be deleted.”
I am glad that the amendments are acceptable to Dr. Ambedkar. My reason for these are that it would be derogatory to the dignity of the President or the Governor to be described as ‘provisional’. I commend the amendments for the aceptance of the House.
*The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot accept this amendment. My Friends Mr. Kamat and Prof. Saksena have read a great deal into this article 312-E. As a matter of fact the article is of very limited importance and the question that is dealt with in this article is the determination of the population of any particular area. My friends very well know that according to the article which we have already passed the population for purposes of election is to be taken as determined by the last census. It is also accepted that having regard to the partition of India the census fgures for 1941 cannot be taken as accurate, and consequently the delimitation of constituencies and the fixation of seats cannot be based upon the truncated provinces whose population figures have been consid *CAD, Vol. X, 7th October 1949, pP. 26-27.