On 3rd September 1949, the following exchange took place at the Constituent Assembly between Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and Deshmukh;
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: The word agriculturist has no precise meaning, it may mean track-renter, it may mean a person who is actually a cultivator, it may mean a person who has 2 acres, it mean also a person, who has 5000 acres or 500,000 acres.”
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: I am prepared to omit that particular expression [does we want that the State should also undertake the welfare of Zamindar who pay Rs. 500,000/- as land revenue? [R. K. Sidhwa – you can drop those words]
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: I am prepare to omit that particular expression
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: — The 2nd point is my friend, Dr. Deshmukh does not seem to pay much attention to the different entries and what they mean. So far as agriculturist is concerned we have got two specific entries in List No. 2 – 21 it is agriculture and No. 24 it is land. If he were to refer these two entries he will find.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: What fallacious argument are being advanced. For that matter labour welfare is a specific entry and yet we wanted a separate provision for their vocational training? Do not advance fallacious arguments.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It is not my business to answer question relating to the faults of administration. I am only explaining what the entries mean. As I said we have already got two entries in List 2 entry 21 is there for agriculture including agricultural education and research, protection against tests and prevention of plant diseases.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: Then why do you want welfare of labour.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: why can’t you some patience? I know my job, do you mean to say, I do not know my job, I certainly know my job.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: I know your attitude also, do not try to fool everybody.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: There is already an entry which will empower any States to do any kind welfare work not merely with regard to agriculture but with regard to agriculturists as well in addition to that we have entry 24 where it is provided the laws may be made with regard to right in or over land tenure including landlord and tenant all the economic interest of the peasants can be dealt with under this entry therefore so far as entry for concerned there is nothing that is wanting to enable provincial government to act in the matter of welfare of agriculture clauses then I come to question raised by my friend Mr. Sidhwa which I think it is a very legitimate, this question was what was the connotation of the word labour and he ask me a very definite question whether labour meant both industrial as well as agricultural, I think that was his question. My answer emphatically that it includes both kinds of labour the entry is not intended to limit itself the industrial labour, any kind of welfare work relating to labour whether the labour is industrial labour or agricultural labour will be open to undertaken either by the Centre or by the province under entry 26.
Similarly conditions of work provident funds, employees liability, employers liability, workmen compensation, health insurance including invalidity pension – all these matters – would be open to all sorts of labour whether it is industrial labour r agricultural labour therefore so far this entry No. 26 concerned it is in no sense limited to industrial labour and therefore the kind of amendment it has been proposed by my friend, Dr. Deshmukh is absolutely unnecessary. Besides its being what I might call vague and indefinite to which no legal connotation can be given.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh: Is there no class of persons except agricultural labour in this country as Dr. Ambedkar ever heard of a class called farmers and peasants?
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: there will be welfare will be attended to under entries 21 and 24 of the provincial list as I already explained
Mr. Vice President: I now place amendment no 250 [Dr. Deshmukh’s amendment] before this House, the question is— 26B Welfare of peasants, farmers and agriculturists of all sorts [new entry be added – in amendment 133 of List 1 [6th week] of the proposed new entry 26A of List 3 the following may be added]
Motion was negative
Comment: A bit of battle of wit was listened by the speakers resulting in the defeat of a comprehensive motion.